S.CHAKARBARTI,J. - (1.) Mr. Majumder, the learned advocate for the petitioner has produced evidence of service of the order dated August 28, 2017 passed by this Court on the respondent No. 1. In spite of it, none appears on behalf of the respondent No. 1 and no accommodation has been sought for. Let a copy of notice received by the respondent No. 1 and produced in Court today be kept with the record.
(2.) The petitioner challenges the order dated February 6, 2017 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court in L.C. Application No. 04 of 2004 under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act (the Act, for short).
(3.) The respondent No. 1 was an employee of the petitioner company and he retired on October 25, 1998. According to the petitioner herein, the respondent No. 1 was paid all his dues and during his tenure of service, he never raised any question that there was any mistake in either calculation of his monthly salary or there was any mistake in payment thereof. In the year 2004, he made an application under Section 33(C)(2) of the Act before the Tribunal, inter alia, praying for payment of Rs. 29,855.05/- as per the particulars given therein.;