AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J. - (1.) IN the present writ application the prayer for the petitioner is for quashing the award dated 5.3.1997 as contained in Annexure -7, whereby the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1 Dhanbad has set aside the order of dismissal and has ordered to reinstate the Respondent No. 2 in service with 50% of the back wages with all other benefits including continuity of service, seniority etc., in Ref. Case No. 88 of 1993 under Sec.10(1)(d)(2A) of the Industrial Dispute Act.
(2.) THE respondent No. 2 Bishwanth Sarkar was working as a Drill man 'C ' with the petitioner. It is stated that there was 50 group known a Crew, consisting of one drill man and two helpers in each group and respondent No. 2 i.e. workman concerned was served with a charge - sheet on 30.4.1992 alleging that he had resorted to go slow tactics with effect from 18.4.1992 resulting in reduction in production. In -spite of the order/direction of the Management he did not give normal production and by deliberately slowing down the work and disobeyed the order of the Management and therefore it amounted to misconduct. Thereafter domestic enquiry was constituted by appointing Enquiry Officer and Enquiry Officer found him guilty and on that basis, the order of dismissal from service dated 21.9.1992 was issued to him.
(3.) THE Central Government in exercise of power conferred by Clause (d) and Sub -section (10) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute for adjudication to the Tribunal. "Whether the action of the management of Uranium Corporation of India Ltd. is dismissing Shri Biswanath Sarkar Drill man 'C ' Token No. 1830 vide their order dated 21.9.1992 justified? if not to what relief the workman is entitled -;