Management challenged a Labour Court award reinstating a workman, contending it had no opportunity to adduce evidence. The High Court found several opportunities and adjournments had been given over 11 years, held no natural justice violation was made out under Article 226, and dismissed the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P No.20865 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-06-2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER
W.P.No.20865 of 2026 and
WMP Nos.22515 and 22516 of 2026
M/s.Woosu Automotive India Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Authorized Signatory, Mr.Arun Kumar, No.130, Narasingapuram Village, Perambakkam Post, Tiruvallur - 631 402.
.. Petitioner Vs.
M.Arulkumar .. Respondent
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the impugned order dated 06.04.2026 in I.D.No.220 of 2015, passed by the II Additional Labour Court, at Chennai and quash the same.
For Petitioner: Mr.R.Ganesan For Respondent: Mr.M.Gokul Prasanth
ORDER
This Writ Petition had been filed challenging the order dated 06.04.2026
in I.D.No.220 of 2015 passed by the II Additional Labour Court, Chennai.
1/7
W.P No.20865 of 2026
2/7
W.P No.20865 of 2026
to have been passed, however, the Court had passed order on merits which is contrary to Order XVII Rules 2 and 3 of C.P.C. The learned counsel therefore submits that for the reason of not granting any opportunity to the Management
to adduce evidence, the order passed by the Labour Court has to be set aside and the matter should be remitted back to the Labour Court for the limited purpose of granting opportunity to the Management to adduce evidence.
3/7
W.P No.20865 of 2026
the petitioner / Management filed several writ petitions and obtained order of stay of the proceedings of the Labour Court. Finally, all the writ petitions were dismissed, directing the Management to let in evidence. After the writ petitions were disposed of, several adjournments were granted by the Labour Court, enabling the Management to adduce evidence. However, the Management failed to adduce evidence and the evidence was closed. The matter was thereafter adjourned for arguments. After three adjournments, on 16.02.2026, the learned counsel for the workman had argued the case. Again on 18.02.2026, an application was filed by the Management to reopen the evidence of the Management. The said petition to reopen the evidence on behalf of the Management was supposed to have been filed in all 59 similar cases which were pending before the Labour Court. The learned Labour Court Judge, after going through the facts of the case and keeping in view the long pendency and that the Management approached the High Court by filing Writ Petitions, wherein the High Court directed the Management to adduce evidence, but they failed to do so, deemed it proper to reject the application of the Management to adduce evidence. The refusal of the Labour Court, dismissing the application to reopen the evidence of the Management, is also extracted in the impugned order, which
4/7
W.P No.20865 of 2026
speaks volumes of the conduct of the Management. Hence, the ground urged by the learned counsel for the Management that no opportunity was given to adduce evidence, cannot be accepted. The only ground on which the counsel seeks to set aside the impugned order is that the Management was not given any opportunity to adduce evidence.
5/7
W.P No.20865 of 2026
This Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, can only interfere if there are any violations of the Principles of Natural Justice or if any orders are passed contrary to any law. No such grounds are made out to interfere with the impugned order.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(K. SURENDER, J) 08-06-2026
cs
To
The II Additional Labour Court, Chennai.
6/7
W.P No.20865 of 2026
K.SURENDER J
cs
W.P.No.20865 of 2026
08-06-2026
7/7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Labour Court denied the Management an opportunity to adduce evidence before passing its award in the industrial dispute.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
M/s.Woosu Automotive India Pvt. Ltd.
M.Arulkumar
K.Surender
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
