( 1 ) ALL these Writ Appeals arising out of a common order passed by the learned single Judge in W. P. Nos. 20741, 20923 and 20916 of 2001 respectively were heard together and are being disposed of by this common Judgment.

( 2 ) THE only question that arises for consideration in these appeals filed by M/s Hindustan Machine Tools Ltd. , Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as the appellant) is, whether the Labour Court has jurisdiction to reopen the matter enabling the parties to adduce further evidence and mark documents etc once hearing was concluded and the matter was reserved for judgment.

( 3 ) THE controversy arose in the following factual matrix: The 1st respondent herein is a retired employee of the appellant-organisation having retired from service under Voluntary Retirement Scheme introduced by the appellant-management in the year 1998. He filed M. P. No. 75 of 1999 on the file of the Labour Court-I, Hyderabad for recovery of the arrears due towards terminal benefits. The learned Labour Court heard the matter on 27. 10. 2000 and reserved the same for orders and directed it to be listed on 8. 11. 2000. According to the petitioner, the matter was suo motu reopened by the Labou

Click Here to Read the rest of this document