HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No.161 of 2023 08th October, 2025 M/s Fulford India Ltd. and others ………..Petitioners Versus R.K. Dharni ………….Respondent ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Harsh Vardhan Dhanik, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate for the respondent. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. This writ petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the petitioners, whereby they have put to challenge the order dated 19.10.2022, passed by Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, Haldwani, Nainital, whereby the Application No.57 D filed by the petitioner-employer has been rejected. 2. From perusal of the record, it transpires that an Application No.57 D has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer to decide additional issues nos.1 and 2 before proceeding further with the case as preliminary issues. 3. The said application has been rejected by the Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, Haldwani, Nainital by the impugned order. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners-employers that these issues are core issues and should have been dealt with by Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, Haldwani, Nainital at first before proceeding further with the case. 1 5. Counsel for the respondent-Workman submits that the issue as to whether the respondent-Workman falls within the definition of Workman is an issue which can only be decided after recording of the evidence between the parties. 6. Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, Haldwani, Nainital vide impugned order has dismissed the said application holding that the issue are additional issues and not preliminary issues, therefore, the same shall be decided at the stage of trial. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that there is no infirmity or mistake on the part of the trial court while rejecting the Application No.57 D. The issue, rightly said by the learned counsel for the respondent- Workman, can be decided on the basis of the evidence adduced/produced by the parties. Such an application filed 57 D is nothing but a delaying tactic on the part of the petitioner-employer. The trial is held up on this issue since 2016. 8. I do not find any fault in order impugned. 9. Accordingly writ petition stand dismissed. The learned Industrial Dispute and Labour Court is directed to expedite the hearing of the matter. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 08.10.2025 SK 2