Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Indicon Boilers Limited vs The Presiding Officer And Another on 1 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No. : 2024:PHHC:043380 CWP-24946-2017 -l- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 235 CWP-24946-2017 Decided on : 01.04.2024 M/s Indicon Boilers Limited ... Petitioner(s) Versus The Presiding Officer, Labour Court-III, Faridabad and another ... Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Vivek Singla, Advocate for the petitioner(s). None for respondent No.2. 2 3 ok ok SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
1. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner -- M/s Indicon Boiler Limited (Management), for seeking quashing of the impugned orders dated 04.02.2016 and 04.07.2017 (Annexures P-3 and P-6, respectively), passed by learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-III, Faridabad (respondent No.1), whereby, application for recalling the order dated 04.02.2016, was dismissed.
2. Vide impugned order dated 04.02.2016 (P-3), in the absence of conducting any cross-examination, despite affording 9 effective opportunities, learned Labour Court treated the cross-examination as nil. Thereafter, the evidence of the workman was closed. Petitioner -- Management has also challenged the order dated 04.07.2017 (P-6), whereby, application dated 07.03.2017 (P-4) filed by the petitioner - Management for setting aside of order dated 04.02.2016 (P-3), whereby, the order directing to treat cross-examination of two witnesses of the workman i... WW1 & WWz2, as "nil", was dismissed.
3. On assailing both the orders before this Court, notice of motion was issued on 02.11.2017, and thereafter, on 07.12.2017, further proceedings before the Labour Court were stayed. Thereupon, the interim LAVISHA 2024.04.02 17:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh Neutral Citation No. : 2024:PHHC:043380 CWP-24946-2017 -2- stay order was continued.
Thus, till date reference under Section 10(1)(C) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short, 'ID Act'), could not be decided within the appropriate time-frame.
4. On perusal of the impugned order dated 04.07.2017 (Annexure P-6), it is amply clear that petitioner --- Management was afforded nine effective opportunities, but it failed to cross-examine the witnesses of the workman, and said fact, has been recorded in the impugned order dated 04.02.2016 (P-3) also.
5. After taking note of all the factual aspects coupled with the fact that there is an interim stay operating since 07.12.2017, which has led to pendency of the reference before learned Labour Court, the present writ petition deserves dismissal. The petitioner -- Management took nine effective opportunities to cross-examining the witnesses and after finding no alternative, learned Labour Court closed the evidence vide orders dated 04.02.2016 and 04.07.2017.
6. No legal or factual flaw has been pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner in the impugned orders. It appears that petitioner -- Management's motive is to prolong the proceedings only by taking one excuse or the other.
7. Thus, prayer being in-genuine, present writ petition is hereby dismissed.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE April 01, 2024 Lavisha Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No LAVISHA 2024.04.02 17:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh