Arindam Sinha, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has sought quashing of an award dated 10th November, 2004 passed by the 2nd Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal on a reference made by the Labour Department, Government of West Bengal. By the impugned award the Tribunal held that the termination of service of the private respondent No. 3 was not justified, the petitioner was directed to re -instate him and pay full back wages subject to adjustment. The petitioner's grounds of challenge are, inter alia, the impugned award suffers from errors apparent on the face of it and is utterly perverse.
(2.) THE undisputed facts regarding the private respondent being sought to be retrenched are that the petitioner by its letter dated 22nd August, 1995 informed the private respondent, for the interest of economic running of its branch office it had been decided to reduce establishment expenses and as such his services were no more required. Retrenchment compensation was offered to be paid and the private respondent advised to accept the same. By a letter of the following day the petitioner placed on record, inter alia, the private respondent had refused to accept the letter dated 22nd August, 1995 with its enclosure of demand draft for Rs. 24000/ - for which the same was being sent under cover of the present letter, by registered post. The issues under reference before the Tribunal were: "1. Whether the termination of service of Sri Shambhu Nath Maity is justified? 2. What relief, if any, is he entitled -
(3.) IN the hearing the petitioner confined itself to the position of having duly retrenched the private respondent due to lack of business at its Kolkata office and in the interest of economic running of the same. Submissions were made at length by Mr. Soumya Majumdar, learned advocate on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Anant Kumar Shaw, learned advocate for the private respondent. Notes on arguments were also filed by the said parties.;