S. Saghir Ahmad, J. - (1.) The facts giving rise to this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution are that opposite-party No. 2 was a driver employed by the petitioner in their Branch Office at Lucknow He was retrenched from service. Thereafter a reference was made by the State Government to the Labour Court on the basis of which Adjudication Case No. 57/82 was registered.
(2.) opposite-party No. 2 submitted his written statement in July, 1982 which was also accompanied by an affidavit. The petitioner filed his written statement on 6-8-1982 which was also accompanied by an affidavit. The petitioner filed a rejoinder dated 30-9-1982 (Annexure - 3) to the written statement filed by opposite-party No. 2 who also filed a rejoinder dated 8-11-1982 (Annexure - 4) to the written statement of the petitioner. On 11-5-1984 issues were framed by the labour court and an order was passed that the employer (petitioner) shall lead the evidence on 19-10-1984 an applicant (Annexure - 6) was filed by the petitioner that burden of proof has been wrongly placed on it and that the workman be required to produce his evidence first. This application was rejected by the following order which is written on the margin of Annexure-6. It reads as under ; "Heard parties. The order passed on 11-5-1984 is clear and specific and this court has no jurisdiction to revise the order then passed. The application therefore fails. Sd/- Saran Prasad P. O. 19-10-1984.
(3.) Another application was filed by the petitioner in December, 1984 of which a copy has been filed as Annexure-9. The prayer in this application was that the order dated 11-5-1984 and 19-10-1984 may be recalled and the workman may be directed to lead his evidence, first. This application was also rejected by the Labour Court by its order dated 10-12-1984 which is contained in Annexure-10. It is against this order that the present writ petition has been filed.;