Rajesh Shankar, J. - (1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) The present writ petition has been filed challenging the Award dated 22.02.2012 passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. I, Dhanbad, in Reference No. 291 of 2000, whereby the learned Tribunal has answered the reference in favour of the workman and directed the management to promote/regularise the respondent no. 2 - workman as Shovel Operator GradeII, GroupB from the date of promotion of the junior with arrears of wages.
(3.) The factual background of the case as stated in the present writ petition is that the respondent no. 2 - workman (Shivraj Saw) was originally appointed as a trainee in CategoryI, Mazdoor on 25.09.1989. He was promoted to the post of CategoryII Mazdoor on 01.12.1993 and was promoted/regularised as Shovel Operator GradeII, GroupB w.e.f. 17.11.1996 although, he was working on the said post since 25.03.1992. The petitionermanagement, however, promoted one S. Kabi, who was junior to Shivraj Saw w.e.f. 18.04.1995. The respondent no. 2 -workman raised industrial dispute which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad vide Reference No. 291 of 2000. The term of the reference was "whether the action of the management in not promoting Shivraj Saw along with his juniors is justified or not and if not then what relief is the workman entitled to and from what date". The learned Tribunal vide award dated 22.02.2012 answered the reference in favour of the workman by holding that the attitude of the management is discriminatory against the respondent no. 2 in not promoting him to the post of Shovel Operator GradeII, GroupB along with his junior S. Kabi, thus, the respondent no. 2 is entitled for promotion and difference of wages from the date of promotion of S. Kabi. Aggrieved by the said award, the petitionermanagement has filed the present writ petition.;