High CourtsDivision Bench(2023) 09 OHC CK 0211

Management of M/s. Steel Authority of India Ltd vs Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal & Another

Orissa High Court · Decided on 27 September 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J · Murahari Sri Raman, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 3419 Of 2014

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 349 words
1.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

The present petition by the Management seeks to challenge an order dated 10.12.2013 passed by the Labour Court, Rourkela in Misc. Case No.14 of 2004, whereby the Labour Court held that the domestic enquiry preceding the termination of services of the Respondent-Workman was unfair and thereby rejected the prayer of the Management under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

3.

The point urged by the Management is that the Labour Court should have permitted the Management to lead evidence and decided the said issue as a preliminary issue.

4.

Indeed, in Karnataka State Road Transport Corpn. V. Smt. Lakshmidevamma, AIR 2001 SC 2090, the Supreme Court observed as under:

“For the foregoing reasons, it is not possible to hold that if the employer does not express his desire to lead additional evidence in reply to statement of claim in proceedings under Section 10 or when an application is filed for approval under Section 33(2)(b) of the Act, the employer cannot be allowed to exercise option at a later stage of the proceedings by making an application for the purpose. The employer’s request, when made before close of proceedings, deserves to be examined by the Labour Court/Tribunal on its own merits and it goes without saying that the Labour Court / Tribunal will exercise discretion on well settled judicial principles and would examine the bona fides of the employer in making such an application.”

5.

In that view of the matter, the Court sets aside the impugned order dated 10.12.2013 passed by the Labour Court, Rourkela and holds that the prayer of the Management to be permitted to lead evidence on the preliminary issue of the fairness of domestic enquiry shall stand allowed and that issue will be decided as a preliminary issue.

6.

The matter, namely, M.C. No.14 of 2004 will be listed before the Labour Court, Rourkela for directions on 12.12.2023.

7.

The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

8.

A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court forthwith.

……………………………