JUDGMENT :

A.C. Agarwal, J.—Admit.

2. On application of Mr. Rele for the petitioner, the name of respondent No. 1 is deleted. Miss Buch for original respondent No. 2 waives service.

3. By consent appeal is called out for hearing and final disposal. Heard parties.

4. The short question which arises for our consideration is, "On whom does the burden lie to prove the fairness or otherwise of the Domestic Enquiry which has culminated in an order of dismissal passed against the workmen of the petitioner Company. By an order passed on 30th September, 1993, the learned Presiding Officer, 4th Labour Court, Thane has held that the burden lies on the company and has directed it to lead evidence first on the issue of fairness of the enquiry. The said order was sought to be impugned by the petitioner by filing a Writ Petition, being Writ Petition No. 4 of 1994. By an order passed on 5th January 1994, the learned single Judge has rejected the petition on the ground that the order impugned is interlocutory. The said order is impugned in the present Letters Patent Appeal.

5. In the case between Airtech Private Ltd. v. State of U.P. & Ors. 1984 (49) FLR 38, the Allahabad High Court has observed as foll