JUDGMENT

% (ORAL)

In the above captioned three petitions, challenge is to the impugned order of 13th January, 2015 vide which the concerned Labour Court has permitted respondent-Management to be represented by a counsel while noting that there was an implied consent of petitioners to respondent- Management being represented by a counsel. It is also noted in the impugned order that respondent’s counsel has appeared on 11 dates and had got the entire evidence of respondent-Management recorded.

Since the impugned order is being assailed in above-captioned three petitions on identical grounds, therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, they were heard together and by this common order, these petitions are being disposed of.

At the hearing, learned counsel for petitioners had placed reliance upon decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court in Prasar Bharti Broadcasting Corporation of India Vs. Shri Suraj Pal Sharma & Anr. 1999 LLR 352 to submit when no formal leave was sought from the Court/Tribunal, then the Management cannot be permitted to be represented by a legal practitioner. Reliance was also placed by learned counsel for petitioners upon decisions of Apex Court