BRAHMANI RIVER PELLETS LTD. Vs. SHASHIKANT MOHANTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Rath, learned advocate appears on behalf of the management and submits, by, inter alia, impugned order dtd. 28/6/2022, the labour Court, purportedly relying on rule 16 in Odisha Industrial Disputes Rules, 1959, marked a salary slip produced by the workman after conclusion of evidence, as Ext.3. He submits, the exhibit slip cannot be relied upon as evidence. On query from Court he draws attention to the objection filed, from which paragraph-6 is extracted and reproduced below.

(2.) On further query from Court he submits, his client made application (annexure-7), on which order dtd. 5/9/2022, also under challenge, was made. A passage from said order is extracted and reproduced below.

(3.) Rule 16 empowers, inter alia, acceptance of evidence at any stage of the proceeding. Clause (c) under rule 25 provides for reception of evidence taken on affidavit by the labour Court having same powers as vested in a civil Court under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Simply production of a document and pronouncing it as evidence, does not make it a piece of evidence. The Civil Procedure Code, under rule 4 in order XVIII provides for recording of evidence. Examination-in-chief is to be by affidavit provided that where documents are filed and parties rely upon them, the proof and admissibility of such documents shall be subject to orders of the Court. Here, where petitioner had objected to the documents, impugned order pronouncing upon its admissibility, without giving opportunity of cross-examination, appears to be illegal.