J.C.VERMA, J. - (1.) The labour dispute in regard to termination of service of respondent No. 2 Mithu Lal is still pending before the Labour Court for the last 17 years for final adjudication. Primarily for the reason that stay had been granted by this Court against the decision of preliminary issue in regard to legality of domestic enquiry held by petitioner management against the workman; the main dispute is still pending.
(2.) The respondent workman was dismissed from service in August, 1986. He raised the industrial dispute vide Annexure-5 and vide Annexure-7 dated March 12, 1990 the dispute was referred to Labour Court for adjudication on the point of termination of service of workman. The workman challenged the order of termination on the point of domestic enquiry as well to the effect that the enquiry held by the management was unfair and not legal or against the principles of natural justice. This objection of petitioner was heard by Labour Court and vide order June 9, 1992, copy of which is attached as Annexure-10. The Labour Court had returned the finding that the enquiry as held by the petitioner was not in accordance with law and stood vitiated. As is required under law the petitioner management was directed to lead fresh evidence in support of allegation for proving the charge. The petitioner management instead of fighting the case in Labour Court on merits, filed present writ petition challenging the impugned order Annexure-10, given on preliminary issue. The proceedings of Labour Court were stayed by this Court.
(3.) The fact remains that the actual dispute of workman in regard to legality of termination of service of workman has not been adjudicated upon as yet. Counsel for petitioner submits that even though in normal course, the writ petition is not maintainable on the decision of preliminary issue, but if the principle issue itself establishes the right of party in that situation according to petitioner the writ petition is still maintainable.;