JAGDISH SAHAI,J. - (1.) THE petitioner, Central Distillery and Chemical works Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Distillery) is a limited liability company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. It is engaged in manufacturing power alcohol. One Sri Jagdish Prasad Sharma (hereinafter called Sharma) was employed as a turner in the Distillery. The management or the Distillery served a charge -sheet dated 9th July, 1956 on Sharma on 10th July, 1956. In that connection, an Enquiry Committee, consisting of Sri S.S. Singhal, secretary of the Distillery, Sri B.N. Khanna, Chemist of the Distillery and Sri Mahendra Singh, one of the workmen of the Distillery was appointed to investigate into the charges against Sharma. on the basis of the report of the Enquiry Committee, the management of the Distillery held Sharma guilty of gross misconduct and by their order dated 26th July, 1956, which was served on Sharma on 27th July, 1956, dismissed him from service. By its order dated the 18th December, 1956 the State Government referred the following dispute for adjudication by Sri K.K. Pandey, Regional Conciliation Officer who was appointed Adjudicator : "Whether the employers have wrongfully and/or unjustifiably terminated the services of Sri Jagdish Prasad Sharma ? If so, to what relief is he entitled ?" The Adjudicator gave his Award and the State Government by means of notification No. 3625 (ST)/XXXVI -A -51(ST)/1956 dated October 5, 1957 enforced the Award for a period of one year with effect from 5th of October, 1357. The Distillery then filed the present petition on 31st of October, 1957. The prayer in the petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorari or order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order of the State Government enforcing the Award. The matter came up before a learned Single judge (V.D. Bhargava, J.) who referred this case to a Division Bench.
(2.) WE have heard Mr. S.C. Khare for the petitioner, Mr. R.C. Verma for the respondent No. 3, the Central Distillery Mazdoor Union, and the learned Junior standing Counsel for respondents Nos. 1 and 2, the State of Uttar Pradesh and Sri K.K. Pandey, the Adjudicator respectively. The submissions that were made before the learned Singh Judge, were repeated before us. They are as follows : (1) The order of reference by the State Government was bad inasmuch as it did not contain reasons for referring the matter to the Adjudicator and not an Industrial Tribunal. (2) The Award of the Adjudicator was without jurisdiction inasmuch as he held that even though Sharma was guilty of misconduct, the punishment awarded to him was excessive. After the coming into force of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1 or 1957, there was no jurisdiction to enforce an award given by an Adjudicator.
(3.) THE Adjudicator was bound to pronounce the Award which he did not do with the result that the Award is Invalidated. (3) No other point was urged before us. (4) we will take the submissions made by the learned counsel seriatim.;