R.K.MERATHIA, J. - (1.) PETITIONER has challenged the order dated 10.2.1990 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad (respondent No. 1) by which the preliminary issue was decided against the management to the effect that the domestic enquiry was not fair and proper and the award dated 14.2.1997 passed by the tribunal in Reference No. 85 of 1988 was against the management and in favour of the workman.
(2.) KARA Bhuiya, the workman, was charged for abusing and assaulting the Assistant Colliery Manager of the Colliery. He was charge -sheeted. The domestic enquiry was held. He was found guilty. Ultimately he was dismissed from service on 17.8.1985. The tribunal held that the charge -sheet and the enquiry report having not been furnished to the workman, the punishment was bad. It ordered for his reinstatement with 50% full back wages from the date of reinstatement (?). Mr. Anoop Kumar Mehta, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the award is perverse so far as the finding of non -submission of charge -sheet is concerned. He submitted that there were sufficient materials on record to show that the charge -sheet was served on the workman. Even the workman who was examined as W.W. 1 admitted in his evidence that he was served with a charge - sheet.
(3.) ON this, Mr. Tewari submitted that due to non -submission of the enquiry report, the order of punishment is bad as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad v. Karunakar . He submitted that even without asking and even if no rules provided for supplying the copy of enquiry report, it should have been served on the workman. He further informed this Court that the workman having died in 1994, his heirs are entitled to 50% of the back wages from the date of dismissal till he reached the age of superannuation, i.e. 1.7.1990.;