Delhi Transport Corporation vs Shri Bijender Singh

Mukul Mudgal, J.—The impugned Order dated 26th May, 1999 closes the evidence of the petitioner by way of affidavit as examination-in-chief because the deponent, Shri Hari Raj Singh was not present for cross-examination. The solitary instance of the absence of the Hari Raj Singh on 26th May, 1999 led to the impugned order. Based on no evidence led on behalf of the management, the application seeking approval for termination of respondent''s services was dismissed by the Tribunal.

In my view, considering the facts and the circumstances of the case and the nature of the allegations against the respondent/workman and a solitary instance of the deponent Hari Raj Singh''s absence, it is appropriate that the petitioner be given the opportunity to lead its evidence subject to the payment of the costs as it is due to the petitioner''s fault that the respondent/workman has been dragged in this Court.

Accordingly, the Order dated 26th May, 1999 is set aside as it denies an opportunity to the petitioner management to lead the evidence of Shri Hari Raj Singh. Hari Raj Singh is directed to present himself in the witness box for cross-examination before the Industrial Tribunal on 19th September, 2003. The Industrial Tribunal is directed to dispose of the petitioner''s application u/s 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, afresh and expeditiously preferably by 31st December, 2003. Since the respondent/workman has been dragged to this Court for no fault of his and entirely due to the conduct of the petitioner management, he shall be entitled to the costs, quantified at Rs.15,000/- payable on the date on which the parties appear before the Tribunal.

The writ petition accordingly stands allowed and disposed of as such.