1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02.07.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL W.P.No.27999 of 2023 and WMP.No.27507 of 2023 The Management of KRV Spinning Mills Private Limited Rep.by its Managing Director, Mecheri Main Road, Naangavalli-636 454 Mettur Taluk, Salem District. ... Petitioner Vs K.G.Sivakumar ... Respondent PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the Labour Court, Salem in I.A.No.01 of 2022 in I.D.No.101 of 2012 and quash its order dated 24.07.2023 and further permit the petitioner to adduce further evidence. For Petitioner : Mr.Anand Gopalan for M/s.T.S.Gopalan and Co. Advocates For Respondent : Mr.R.Thirumoorthy https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2 O R D E R This writ petition has been filed to quash the order passed by the Labour Court, Salem in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in I.D.No.101 of 2012 dated 24.07.2023, wherein, the management has filed the petition to reopen the main I.D. which was posted for adducing evidence and the same was dismissed by the Labour Court, Salem. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition is filed. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Court, Salem in I.D.No.101 of 2012 and the same is pending. Already, after the completion of evidence on both sides, the case was posted for arguments. At that stage, the Court asked for certain clarifications in respect of Ex.R9, production log sheet. Therefore, in order to clarify, t they need to examine a witness on their side. Therefore, they filed a petition in I.A. No.1/2022 to re-open the case to adduce evidence for the purpose of clarifying the contents of the log sheet. The Labour Court dismissed the petition by holding that as the case had been pending for more than 10 years, and the management also took several years to establish a charge against the workmen, thereafter, it was posted for arguments, therefore only to prolong https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3 the case, this writ petition has been filed. The above said observations made by the Tribunal are against law. Therefore, the order passed by the Labour Court is liable to be set aside, and the petitioner may be given a chance to clarify Ex.R.9. He also further submitted that examination of witnesses would not take much time, as they can examine only one witness and complete the evidence on the same day. Therefore, the petitioner prays to allow this writ petition. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the case has been pending from 2012 onwards and, after the examination of witnesses on both sides, the case has been posted for arguments. At this stage, the petitioner filed this petition without any valid reasons. Therefore, the Labour Court passed a reasoned order holding that only to drag on the proceedings, the petition has been filed and there is no merits in this petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 4. This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4 5. In this case, the respondent raised an industrial dispute before the Labour Court, Salem and already both sides evidences were closed, and the case was posted for arguments. It was also not disputed that the Court posted the case for clarification in respect of Ex.R9. Therefore, the petitioner filed a petition to clarity Ex.R9 through the examination of the concerned witness. It is an admitted fact that the author of Ex.R9 was not examined as a witness, therefore, the petitioner wanted to examine the witness to clarify Ex.R9, the production log sheet. By examining the witness no prejudice would to be caused to the other side. Therefore, in order to give a fair chance to the petitioner and to meet the ends of justice, it is appropriate to give a fair chance to the petitioner, and this petition is to be allowed. It is true that the case has been pending from 2012 onwards, the delay was not only on the part of the petitioner. Therefore, in order to give a fair chance to the petitioner, the order has to be set aside by permitting the petitioner to examine witness in the main I.D, in respect of Ex.R9. 6. Therefore, in view of the above said discussion, this writ petition is allowed by setting aside the passed by the Labour Court in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in I.D. No101 of 2012 dated 24.07.2023 and the petitioner is directed https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5 to examine the witness within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order before the Trial Court and thereafter the Labour Court, Salem, shall dispose of the main I.D., without any delay, preferably within a period of two months. 7. With the above said direction, this writ petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 02.07.2025 drl To 1. The Labour Court, Salem. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6 P.DHANABAL, J., drl W.P.No.27999 of 2023 and WMP.No.27507 of 2023 (½) 02.07.2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis