The need for evidence to support applications, the allowance of additional preliminary issues, and the emphasis on expeditious resolution of matters.

Suresh Kait, J. (Oral):--

CM No. 15270/2014 (for exemption)

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 6333/2014

1. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks directions to quash the order dated 11.08.2014 passed in I.E. No. 83/13 (Old No. 535/2005) by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court-XVI, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi.

2. Ms. Reena Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that Smt. Meenakshi Vats claimed to be working as Senior Assistant with Kangra Cooperative Bank Ltd., Janakpuri, Delhi, whereas she is a practising Advocate and enrolled with Bar Council of Delhi.

3. However, the learned Tribunal vide impugned order dated 11.08.2014 has ordered that issues raised in the application filed under Section 340 Cr.P.C. can be entertained on merits after considering the material and evidence on record, thus, directed the petitioner to lead evidence. Accordingly, the application of the petitioner was dismissed being filed at pre-mature stage.

4. Second issue raised by the petitioner is that the application of the Management seeking framing of additional preliminary issues has been allowed by the learned Tribunal vide aforesaid order dated 11.08.2014. Accordingly, one additional issue was framed as follows:-

“Whether the claim Petition filed by the workman is barred by limitation or not”?

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition filed by the petitioner/claimant is not barred by time and framing additional issue will cause delay in deciding the matter pending before the Tribunal.

6. It is admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. was not supported by any documentary proof or evidence on record, therefore, I am of the considered view that the learned Tribunal has rightly directed the petitioner to lead evidence.

7. As far as the issue of framing of additional issue is concerned, as stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that the claim filed by the petitioner is not barred by time, in that eventuality, no harm is going to cause to the petitioner.

8. In view of above, I do not find any force in the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

9. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court to the order dated 10.07.2014, whereby this Court directed the learned Tribunal to decide the matter within three months. However, till date the same has not been decided.

10. Keeping in view the directions dated 10.07.2014, this Court expects from the learned Tribunal to decide the matter expeditiously, preferably by December 2014.

11. The instant petition is dismissed.