Ram Bhagat Son Of Molu Ram vs The Divisional Forest Officer (T) on 6 July, 2009

CWP No. 17914 of 2008                                  1


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH


                                CWP No. 17914 of 2008
                                Date of decision July 6, 2009

Ram Bhagat son of Molu Ram

                                                       .......   Petitioner
                                Versus

The Divisional Forest Officer (T), Hisar, District Hisar and another


                                                       ........Respondents

CORAM:            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN

Present:-         Mr. T. C. Dhanwal, Advocate
                  for the petitioner.

                  Mr. D. S. Nalwa, Additional Advocate General
                  Haryana for the respondent.

                         ****

1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be
allowed to see the judgment ?

2. To be referred to the reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the
digest?

K. Kannan, J (oral).

1. The writ petitioner challenges the order directing

closure of evidence dated 25.3.2008 and subsequent order dated

21.7.2008 dismissing the writ petition by the Presiding Officer, Industrial

Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Hisar. Labour Court found that the petitioner

has not adduced evidence to substantiate his contention and found that the

workman was not entitled to any relief.

2. Before this Court it is contended that the absence

of the workman before the Labour Court on the date when the case was

posted and to several dates when the case had been adjourned was on

account of his own illness and eye problem. Learned counsel for the

petitioner seeks only two more opportunities to be given to him to adduce
CWP No. 17914 of 2008 2

evidence.

3. Even without going into the merits of the

contentions of the respective parties, in the interest of justice, I find it

appropriate to set aside the orders of the Labour Court dated 25.3.2008

and 21.7.2008, and direct to reopen the case of the petitioner and afford

sufficient opportunity for at least two effective dates offg hearing for

adducing evidence on the side of the workman. The workman shall

produce his witness at his own risk and responsibility and conclude the

case within the time allotted by the Labour Court as per direction of this

Court.

4. The writ petition is accordingly ordered. Orders

dated 25.3.2008 and 21.7.2008 are set aside.

5. The parties shall appear before the Labour Court,

Hisar on 31.7.2009.

(K. KANNAN)
JUDGE
July 6, 2009
archana