M.P.Konia, J. - (1.) This case was called out twice and even after the list was revised, it was kept back. After waiting for considerable time, however, nobody has chosen to remain present on behalf of respondents Nos. 3 and 4. Standing Counsel was present on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 and 2, and so was Counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) The petitioner M/s. East India Rubber Works Private Limited had employed Devi Kant Jha, Respondent No. 3 in the concerned and it appears that Sri Jha tendered his resignation on the 23rd of February, 1980, doing so in writing. This resignation was accepted on the 29th of February, 1980. This case followed by a reference under Section 4-K read with Section 2-N of the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, for adjudication of an industrial dispute between the employers and the individual workmen, the third respondent.
(3.) It is during the pendency of this dispute, which came to be numbered as adjudication No. 4 of 1982, before the Industrial Tribunal (III) U. P., that the Presiding Officer was pleased to pass an order on the 31st of May, 1982, copy whereof is enclosed herewith as Annexure '5' to the petition, inter alia, coming to the conclusion that the employers (petitioner herein) should lead evidence in the case about the resignation by the workman or whatever evidence the employer considered necessary to establish that the workman's services were not terminated improperly or illegally and it is, thereafter, that the workman will be required to produce his evidence. It is against this order that the petitioner has approached this Court to seek, inter alia, a writ of certiorari quashing the aforesaid order.;