Right to lead evidence in dismissal disputes must be sought at the earliest stage; belated requests are barred.

In industrial adjudication, an employer's right to adduce evidence to justify dismissal after a defective domestic enquiry is procedural and must be invoked at the proper stage. The SC affirmed that the management must reserve and seek that opportunity in its written statement or at the first available stage, so the workman has notice and the tribunal can avoid delay and repeated hearings. Applying the rule in Shambu Nath Goyal, a belated request made only after the preliminary issue on the validity of the enquiry has been decided is not entertainable. The employer's application was therefore rightly rejected as delayed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in industrial adjudication, the management must seek permission to adduce evidence in justification of dismissal at the first available opportunity in its written statement or application, and whether a later request made after the preliminary issue on the validity of the domestic enquiry has been decided can be entertained.

Analysis: The majority examined the earlier line of authorities on the employer's right to adduce evidence when the domestic enquiry is found defective or invalid. It held that the right is procedural and exists to avoid delay and multiplicity of proceedings, but the request must be made at the proper stage so that the workman is put on notice and the tribunal can decide the dispute without avoidable adjournments. The decision in Shambu Nath Goyal was treated as correctly laying down that, in a reference under Section 10 or proceedings under Section 33, the management must reserve and seek that opportunity in the written statement or at the first available stage, and a belated request after the preliminary issue has been decided is not to be allowed.

Conclusion: The majority held that the employer's application for permission to adduce evidence was rightly rejected as belated, and the appeal failed.

---