R.K.MERATHIA, J. - (1.) HEARD the parties. Petitioner/management has prayed for quashing the order of reference contained in Letter No. L -20012(36)/90 -IR (Coal -I) dated 9.11.1990 and also quashing the award dated 28.8.1997 passed by the Central Government Inuustrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad, in Reference Case No. 4 of 1991. By the said award, the Tribunal has directed the Management to regularize the concerned workmen as Black -smith w.e.f. 1.1.1989 and to pay them 30% of the full back wages from the said date.
(2.) BY order dated 17.9.1990 the Central Government referred the following dispute for adjudication to the Tribunal: "Whether the demand of the workmen of Kendwadih Colliery of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited Post Office Kusunda, District, Dhanbad for regularization of Black -smith mentioned in the Annexure as departmental workers is justified? If so, to what relief are the concerned workmen entitled? 1. Chandan Manjhi, 2. Dukhan Mistry, 3. Saudagar Mistry, 4. Sariu Mistry. 5. Raj Kishore Paswan, 6. Gyan Chand Paswan, 7. Mala Paswan, 8. Ram Chandra Garhari, 9. Deo Narain Mistry, 10. Ashok Paswan, 11. Bigan Mistry, 12. Surjdeo Paswan, 13. Chandrika Mistry. 14. Jagranath Mistry, 15. Rajendra Mistry, 16. Munilal Mistry, 17. Rajeshwari Mistry, 18. Ishwar Chandra Mistry, 19. Jago Mistry, 20. Laxman Mistry." But on 9.11.1990, the aforesaid reference was superseded by the following reference, calling it an amendment/corrigendum: "Whether the action of the management of Bhagaband Colliery of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. in not giving employment to contractors workers Shri Siya Ram Biswakarma and seven to contractors workers Shri Siya Ram Biswakarma and seven others shown in Annexure is justified? If not, to what relief are the concerned workmen entitled? 1. Siya Rim Vishwakarma, 2. Janesh -war Vishwakarma, 3. Paras Nath Prasad, 4. Ramdeo Rewani, 5. Prem Bhuiya, 6. Sarjan Bhuiya, 7. Kamta Singh, 8. Indrajit Paswan, 9. Dhanesh -war Prasad."
(3.) THE first question is whether the award based on the impugned second reference dated 9.11.1990 is Illegal? Surprisingly, the Tribunal did not venture to decide this question of validity of the second reference, raised by the Management.;