TAPEN SEN, J. - (1.) HEARD the parties.
(2.) THIS is an application filed by Mahalaxmi Fibres and Industries Limited [The petitioner of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3438 of 1997 (R) for review of the judgment delivered by this Court on 28.04.2003. Accordingly to Mr. K.N. Prasad, learned Senior Advocate, at paragraph -4 infra of the judgment, since it was admitted by both the parties that the respondent No. 2 (meaning thereby the workman) was not connected with reference case No. 16 of 1991 therefore the Award itself was bad because it did not give a finding as to whether that workman was the concerned workman in the pending dispute. Let it be recorded that this case relates to miscellaneous case No. 2 of 1992. It is evident from language of reference case No. 16 of 1991 (Annexure -1 to the counter affidavit herein) that the same was as follows : - - "Whether workman of Mahalaxmi Fibres and Industries Ltd., Ormanjhi, Ranchi are entitled wages for the period of lock -out from 22.12.1989 to 25.1.1990? If not what relief are the workmen entitled -
(3.) IT is evident also from Annexure -2 which was brought on record in the writ petition itself and which was the application under Sec.33(2)(b) filed by the Management that they themselves mentioned in the heading of that petition that the same arose out of reference case No. 16 of 1991 as it was mentioned as "Arising out of reference, case No, 16 of 1991". That apart, the order passed in the aforementioned miscellaneous case No. 2 of 1992 which was the subject matter of challenge in the writ petition, the fact that the workman was an active member and that a number of cases were pending in different Courts was also duly noticed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court in as much as he recorded the submission of the opposite party at paragraph -4 which reads as follows : - - "4. Opposite party appeared and filed show cause stating that applicant 'spetition is not maintainable. The management in fact has victimized the concerned workman by way of the dismissal for the simple reason that he was an active member of the trade union which always oppose the illegal activities of the management. A number of cases are pending in different Courts including one before this Court and the other before the Industrial Tribunal. Both the Industrial Disputes are of general nature in which the opposite party is directly connected. Opposite party was always pressurized to influence the union so that the dispute could be decided in favour of the Management without giving any benefit to the workmen. The opposite party refused to oblige the Management. There were other demand also pending before the management which were not settled. On the contrary the management tried to settle the matter illegally and without giving any benefit to the workman with the help of the pocket union. Since the opposite party was the member of the union Mahalakshmi Sharmik Mazdoor Sangh which always opposed the illegal activities and unfair labour practice of the Management therefore the opposite party was victimized by way of dismissal from his service. In course of his service the opposite party rendered onerous and efficient services. There was no reasonable cause for terminating the services of the opposite party. The punishment inflicted upon the opposite party was disproportionate to the alleged charges. The opposite party was charged on flimsy and false ground. In fact he was not guilty of any charges leveled against him." (underlining supplied) ;