M.Y.EQBAL,J. - (1.) The petitioner who is the management of collieries of M/s Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. has challenged the impugned award dated 3rd March, 1994 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.2, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 98 of 1991 whereby the Tribunal answered the reference in favour of the concerned workman, namely, Sri Parasnath.
(2.) IT appears that the Government of India, Ministry of Labour, in exercise of powers conferred upon them under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication : "Whether the action of the management of TISCO Ltd., Jamadoba in not promoting SI Shri Parasnath, S.P. Shukla, Ram Chandra Singh and J. N. Tiwary to the post of Sub -Inspector is justified? If not, to what relief the workmen are entitled - The concerned workman, Sri Parasnath (hereinafter referred to as the concerned workman) was working as Nayak while three other workmen were working as security guards. They were working in the management of TISCO on permanent basis for the last several years ranging from 16 to 21 years. In pursuance of the notification dated 21.8.88 the concerned workman applied for selection to the post of Sub -Inspector. The concerned workman was asked to appear in the written test. He was also interviewed on the same day. The grievance of the concerned workman was that in spite of securing good marks in the written test, his case was not considered for selection to the post of Sub -Inspector.
(3.) THE case of the management is that the candidates were selected on the basis of their performance in the written test and interview. The concerned workman appeared in the interview but he was not recommended for the post of Sub -Inspector by the Selection Board and he was not appointed as Sub -Inspector.;