Civil Services Officers Institute Through Its General Manager v. Ranjan Kumar Rout

$~70 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 26th March, 2025 + CM(M) 679/2023 & CM APPL. 21026/2023 CIVIL SERVICES OFFICERS INSTITUTE THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Anushuman Sharma & Mr. Azaz Ahmed, Advocates versus RANJAN KUMAR ROUT .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Avtar Singh and Mr. Arjun Dhamija, Advocates

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1.

The petitioner-management is aggrieved by order dated 18.11.2022 whereby learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-IX has directed them to place on record certain documents. The management had also moved an application before the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Court-IX seeking review of the aforesaid order and even prayed for modification that they may be permitted to place on record such documents, only after the completion of workman's evidence and cross-examination. Such application has also been dismissed.

2.

Such orders are under challenge.

3.

The prime contention coming from the side of the management is that the application in question could not have been treated as one filed under Section 11 (3) of Industrial Disputes Act and, therefore, there could not have been any direction for production of documents, unless and until the CM(M) 679/2023 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL 15:19:38

workman's evidence was over.

4.

Learned counsel for workman submits that since the case of the workman is getting delayed, he would have no objection if the aforesaid application is directed to be kept in abeyance and learned Trial Court is requested to consider the same afresh, after the evidence of workman is over and to pass appropriate order, afresh, in accordance with law. 5.

Learned counsel for petitioner, who has joined the proceedings through video conferencing, submits that he would have no objection to the aforesaid proposal.

6.

Accordingly, order dated 18.11.2022, and the subsequent order dated 21.03.2023, are set aside.

7.

Needless to say, the aforesaid orders have been set aside, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of either of the parties and once the evidence of the workman is over, learned Labour Court would be at liberty to decide the above application afresh in accordance with law, without being influenced by the present order.

8.

Since this order has been passed with the consent of the parties and to ensure expeditious disposal of the matter, therefore, it would neither cause any prejudice to any of the parties nor would be taken as a precedent. 9.

Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE MARCH 26, 2025/dr/pb CM(M) 679/2023 2 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL 15:19:38