AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rajiv Narain Raina, J.—This petition has been filed by the management aggrieved by the order dated 3.10.2012 (P-1) passed by the Labour Court, Jalandhar whereby the management''s evidence has been ordered to be closed. The brief facts are that the case was fixed for management''s evidence on 3.10.2012. It is averred that the management had to examine its witness Suresh Jain on the date fixed. Since the witness was taken ill, a request was made on 3.10.2012 for an adjournment. The written request for adjournment was supported by medical certificate issued by a qualified Ayurvedic doctor who found on examination of the patient a mild chest pain.
The Labour Court has dismissed the application for want of medical certificate from a heart specialist. The following order has been passed:--
Present: Sh. Ram Singh AR of the Workman Sh. Iqbal Singh AR of the respondent
No MW''s present. Last opportunity is granted. MW Suresh Jain stated as ill. His medical certificate filed. Perusal of certificate shows that it is issued by BAMS doctor quoting mild chest pain. No certificate from heart specialist filed. It was 4th last opportunity. The management has failed to produce evidence since 23.11.2010. Further opportunity is declined. Management evidence is closed by order. Adjourned to 15.11.12 for arguments.
Sd/- P.O. 3.10.2012
On declining the request, the management''s evidence was closed and the matter was posted for arguments on 15.11.2012. In this background, the writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 3.10.2012.
On 31.1.2013, this Court passed the following order:--
Learned counsel for the petitioner is prepared to pay heavy cost on consideration of the case of the Management on merits following the order dated 3.10.2012 (Annexure P-1) closing the evidence of the Management.
Notice of motion for 1.3.2013. Process dasti as well.
The Labour Court is directed to adjourn this matter to a date after the date fixed by this Court.
On notice of motion having been issued, the 2nd respondent has put in appearance and has expressed no objection if the workman is compensated with costs.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The reason for declining the request for adjournment is not judicious exercise of discretion. Heavens would not have fallen if last opportunity was granted to lead evidence on pain of heavy costs. It would seem too technical an argument that the medical certificate produced with the application requesting adjournment for examination of a witness should have come from a heart specialist and not from a BAMS doctor when the complaint allegedly was mild chest pain. The reason assigned for denial of opportunity is what persuades this Court to interfere in this matter, since it appears irrational. Reasons are the bedrock of jurisprudence of decision making, be it judicial or quasi judicial.
Mr. Raj Kaushik, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 - workman has expressed no objection if the impugned order is set aside subject to payment of costs. Consequently, the order dated 3.10.2012 (P-1) is set aside subject to payment of Rs. 20,000 as costs since four last opportunities had already been granted. The costs be paid in the shape of a Bank draft in the name of the workman on the next date of hearing before the Labour Court. In case, the costs are not paid, the impugned order dated 3.10.2012 would continue to operate. The petitioner-Management is afforded two further opportunities to lead its evidence before the Labour Court. No further adjournment would be granted and that would remain subject to all things equal and to the judicious exercise of discretion of the Labour Court.
The writ petition stands allowed in the above terms.