1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.259 OF 2008 Shri Pandurang Vanniyar )..Petitioner Vs M/s.Technocraft Industries (India) Ltd., )..Respondents ---- Mr.Ambar Joshi for the Petitioner. Mr. A.K.Jalisatgir with Ms.Navneet Chahel for the respondents. ---- Coram : R.S.MOHITE,J Date : 23rd November, 2009. PC 1 Heard both sides. In my view, the matter can be decided finally. Hence, rule. By consent, rule is made returnable. 2 This is a petition filed by the workman impugning an order dated 18.5.2007 passed by the Presiding officer, labour court, Thane, answering the reference against him and in the negative. On perusing the impugned judgment and order, it appears that the reference has been decided in the negative on the footing that the 2nd party/workman has not proved certain documents. On perusal of the roznama, I find that though initially the evidence on behalf of the workman was closed on 13.3.2006, an application filed by the workman for additional examination-in-chief was allowed on 8.1.2007 and the workman was allowed to file further examination-in-chief and was in fact, cross-examined on that date. Roznama 2 indicates that after the cross-examination was completed the observation was made that the list of witnesses was not produced by the 2nd party and hence, the matter was kept for company’s evidence on 29.1.2007. 3 On 29.1.2007 workman filed an application for witness summons to the police witness to enable him to prove the complaint. This application was rejected and ultimately the reference is decided by holding that the workman has not proved certain aspects of his case. I find that the observation made to the effect that “list of witnesses not produced” is erroneous as the observation dated 5.8.2008 indicates that the workman had produced list of witnesses. Be that as it may, in my view, full opportunity of leading evidence is required to be given to the workman. 4 In the circumstances, petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause-(a) and the Judge, 3rd labour Court, Thane, is directed to re-decide the reference no.348/2002 after allowing workman to lead his evidence. Reference should be re-decided within a period of nine months from today. Rule made absolute accordingly. Petition stands disposed off. (R.S.MOHITE,J) 3 4