1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 204 of 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4030 of 2007 Martin Daniel Bhalerao ....Appellant v/s. D.B. Power Electronics (P) Ltd. ....Respondents Shri Nitin A. Kulkarni for the appellant. Shri A.D.patwardhan for the respondents. CORAM:- SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND A.M.KHANWILKAR, J. DATED:- September 01, 2009. P.C. Present Appeal is directed against the Judgment of the Learned Single Judge dated 9th October, 2007 vide which the Writ Petition was dismissed while affirming the Award passed by the Second Labour Court, Pune in Reference No. 394/1997 holding that the Petitioner was not a workman. 2. The case of the management was that the Petitioner is performing the functions of supervisory/managerial nature and, therefore, not a workman. Before the Labour Court, Exhibit D-1 was produced and proved in accordance with law showing the kind of duties, the Petitioner was performing. On the contrary, the Petitioner averred that he was a workman and was performing 2 particular duties. Onus was placed upon the management and management had discharged it by producing Exhibit D-1. The witness examined on behalf of the management clearly stated that nature of functions being performed by the Petitioner were in managerial and supervisory category and Petitioner was not discharging duties and functions of a workman. 3. We must notice that this witness was cross-examined at length but nowhere in the cross-examination, the suggestion was made to the witness that Petitioner was performing the kind of functions which can be termed as predominantly duties and functions of a workman. An effort has been made to say that in affidavit certain details have been given that the duties performed by the Petitioner can also be performed by a Manager, but it was for the Petitioner to show that he was actually performing the functions of a workman and not that of the Manager as such. There is concurrent finding of fact recorded by the Labour Court affirmed by the Learned Single Judge. We see no reason to interfere. Dismissed. CHIEF JUSTICE A.M.KHANWILKAR, J