- (1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE only point raised by the counsel for the appellant is that the order of dismissal of the workmen respondent is perfectly valid as it was passed by the Additional General Manager who is competent to pass the said order in view of the fact that under Clause 14 of the circular issued in 1954 powers of the General Manager have been delegated to the Additional General Manager who passed the order of dismissal of the respondents No. 2. The workman, the respondent No. 2 on being aggrieved by the order of his dismissal, filed an application before the appellate authority which was dismissed. Then he filed a reference case No. 5 of 1990 before the Tribunal which after conducting an enquiry allowed the application on the ground that the Additional General Manager who passed the order of dismissal was not the competent authority and set aside the order of dismissal of the respondent workman and ordered for his reinstatement.
(3.) BEING aggrieved by the order dated 14.7.1997 passed by the Tribunal, the Management filed the writ petition being CWJC No. 2447 of 1998R in which the learned Counsel for the Management/appellant on the basis of the circular produced before the writ Court contended that the circular was issued on 1.10.1985 under Order No. 2/58 which would show that under Clause 14, the General Manager has delegated powers to Additional General Manager to take disciplinary action against any workman and therefore, the order passed by the Tribunal is wrong.;