MODI RUBBERS LTD Vs. K V D PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the respondent in I.D.No. 297 of 1994 filed by the first respondent herein on the file of the Labour Court, Guntur. The petitioner raised a defence that the dispute is barred by the principle of res judicata as the same was already decided by the competent authority under the provisions of A.P. Shops and Establishments Act, 1988 ('the Act'). The petitioner, therefore, filed an application being I.A.No. 186 of 2000 in I.D.No. 297 of 1994 praying the Labour Court to summon the Assistant Commissioner of Labour, Vijayawada, the appellate authority under the provisions of Sec. 48 of the Act for production of documents. It was stated that when the principle of res judicata is raised, the petitioner herein may as well obtain certified copy of the order and proceed with the case and summoning of the Assistant Commissioner is not necessary. The Labour Court observed as follows:

(2.) Assailing the order dated 3-5-2000 in I.A.No. 186 of 2000 in I.D.No. 297 of 1994, the present writ petition is filed.

(3.) Sri P. Prabhakara Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the application was filed to summon the Assistant Commissioner of Labour for production of a document including the minutes/proceedings in a Shops and Establishments Case which are very much required and relevant for the purpose of enquiry in I.D.No. 297 of 1994. Therefore, according to him, it does not amount to summoning the Assistant Commissioner for production of a document and that the Assistant Commissioner may as well depute one of his subordinates for production of the document. In view of this, it is contended that the Labour Court has committed a grave error in rejecting the LA.