- (1.) THE Court : The respondents Nos. 2 to 4 have raised an objection about the maintainability of the present writ petition and as such the issue of maintainability is taken up as a preliminary issue.
(2.) THE present writ petition is directed against an Award dated November 25, 2011 passed by the learned Judge of the Eighth Industrial Tribunal in case No. VIII-25 of 2007. The case of the petitioner, inter alia, is that he was a workman under the respondent No.2. In the year 1985 he was served with a show-cause notice and after an enquiry the petitioner was ultimately dismissed from service with effect from December 23, 1985. An appeal by the petitioner against that decision failed.
(3.) IN a proceeding under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Tribunal the petitioner denied all the charges leveled against him and challenged the order of dismissal. He prayed for back wages and consequential benefits for the period of the alleged forced unemployment. The respondent No. 2 in turn denied the allegations made by the petitioner. The Tribunal on the evidence held that it was difficult to hold unhesitatingly that the guilt of the petitioner had been clearly established on the basis of the materials on record on the standard of preponderance of probability. The Tribunal held that in this case the question of reinstatement does not arise as the petitioner had crossed the age of retirement on superannuation and declined to grant him back wages. However, the Tribunal considering the relevant aspects held that it would be just and equitable if the workman concerned got 50 per cent, of the wages/ salary from the date of dismissal till the date of retirement on superannuation towards compensation along with all due retirement benefits which he was entitled to get as per rule, if the same had not been already paid. The respondent No. 2 herein was directed to make the payment within one month form the date of the publication of the Award.;