Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. Date of decision:22-1-2008 Amar Chakravarty. ...Petitioner. Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ...Respondents. ... Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta. Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. C. Puri. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... K. C. Puri, J. Judgment. Vide this common judgment, we propose to decide Civil Writ Petition Nos. 6575 of 2007, 6915 of 2007, 6924 of 2007, 6956 of 2007,6960 of 2007,7457 of 2007, 7465 of 2007, 7479 of 2007, 8611 of 2007,9037 of 2007 and 9074 of 2007 as common questions of law and fact are involved in all these writ petitions. Facts have, however, been extracted from Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -2- The services of the petitioner were terminated and the petitioner made reference under Section 10.The matter was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication. The Labour Court after the completion of pleadings framed the following issues on 13-5-2002:- 1.Whether the termination of the services of the petitioner is justified and if not to what relief he is entitled to? OPW. 2.Whether the petitioner is gainfully employed? 3.Relief. The management was called upon to lead evidence. However, later on, the learned Labour Court called upon the petitioner to lead evidence in view of Supreme Court authorities to the effect that the onus to prove termination as illegal is upon the workman. The workman has preferred the present writ petition for shifting the onus of issue No.1 upon the management, after setting aside the order dated 31-1-2006 vide which onus of issue No.1 has been placed upon workman. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in all these cases, no domestic enquiry was held and the services of the petitioner were terminated without any enquiry. Therefore, the onus lies upon the management to prove the fact that the management was justified in terminating the services of the petitioner. Had there been any domestic enquiry, in that case, some evidence must have been led by both the parties and the Enquiry Officer after going through the Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -3- record would have recorded finding regarding the guilt of the accused. Since no domestic enquiry has been held and as such the onus of the issue No.1 should have been upon the management and not upon the workman. The Labour Court on 31.1.2006 has wrongly shifted the burden of issue No.1 from the management to workman. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the case remained pending for evidence of the respondent for four years and that the shifting of onus on issue No.1 after such a long period is against law and equity. In reply to the above noted submissions, the learned counsel for respondent No.2 has supported the order of the Labour Court. He has submitted that the petitioner has to prove his case. Negative issue cannot be framed. Otherwise also, onus of issue No.1 has been originally placed upon the workman and not management. However, the Labour Court inadvertently had called upon the respondent to lead evidence. The petitioner is required to prove the fact that he has completed 240 days and his services were terminated illegally. The petitioner has also alleged unfair practice and in view of authority reported as M/s. Bharat iron Works v. Bhagubhai Balubhai Patel and others, AIR 1976 Supreme Court 98, the onus to prove unfair practice is upon the workman and not upon the management. We have heard both sides and have carefully gone through Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -4- the record of the case. From the perusal of issue No.1, it is revealed that onus of same has been placed upon the workman as 'OPW' has been mentioned. However, the case was fixed for the evidence of the respondent. On 19.10.2005 issue No.1-A “Whether the reference is bad in law? OPM” was framed on the request of the management. An application for treating that issue as preliminary was filed by the management but the same was dismissed. However, on the application of the management, the learned Labour Court shifted the onus on issue No.1 from the management to the workman on 20-1-2006 in view of latest law on the point and the petitioner is aggrieved against the said order. It so seems that the Labour Court has inadvertently fixed the case for the evidence of the management instead of workman on 13-5-2002. From the bare reading of word 'OPW', it can safely be inferred that the Labour Court intended to put the burden of issue No.1 upon the petitioner. Otherwise also, one who comes to the Court has to prove his case. In authority in M/s.Bharat Iron Works's case (supra), it has been held that onus of establishing a plea of victimisation will be upon the workman. Otherwise also, in a civil case, the onus to prove a fact is immaterial. So, no interference is required in the present writ petition on that count also. The workman has to prove the fact that he has completed 240 days of his service in the last calendar year and that he was subjected to victimisation and only then he can have the benefit of Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -5- Sections 25F, 25G and 25H. Moreover, the writ Court should not interfere in the proceedings of the Labour Court unless the order of the Labour Court is perverse or illegal. The order of the Labour Court cannot be said to be in any way perverse or illegal. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any force in these writ petitions and consequently all the writ petitions stand dismissed. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January 22,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -6- Civil Writ Petition No.7479 of 2007. D. C. Pathak Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -7- Civil Writ Petition No.7465 of 2007. Ranjan Kumar Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -8- Civil Writ Petition No.7457 of 2007. K.Padmanabhan Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -9- Civil Writ Petition No.9074 of 2007. Surender Mohan Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -10- Civil Writ Petition No.9037 of 2007. D. N. Saini Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -11- January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.7479 of 2007. D. C. Pathak Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -12- ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6960 of 2007. Anil Kumar Sharma. Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -13- Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6956 of 2007. D. K. Chauhan Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -14- ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.8611 of 2007. Babu Sebastian Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -15- Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.7479 of 2007. D. C. Pathak Versus Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -16- Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6924 of 2007. Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -17- S. K. Sharma Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007. -18- Civil Writ Petition No.6915 of 2007. G. K. Walia Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another. ... Present: Mr.Gurinderpal Singh Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Harsh Aggarwal Advocate for respondent No.2. ... For order see Civil Writ Petition No.6575 of 2007 titled Amar Chakravarty Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Gurgaon and another, decided today. ( K. C. Puri ) Judge January ,2008. ( Ashutosh Mohunta ) Jaggi Judge