ORDER

1. Special leave granted.

2. The order under appeal was passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court at Allahabad. The writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed because the learned Judge was of the view that it was not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution.

3. The writ petition was filed to challenge the order of the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court in an industrial dispute. The question was whether the action of the appellant in terminating the services of the first respondent was legal and valid. The Labour Court came to the conclusion that the action of the appellant in terminating the services of the first respondent was "legal and valid and he is not entitled to any benefit". The Labour Court, however, went on to direct that "on humanitarian ground, it would be proper to engage him in any other post than driver". The Labour Court found that the first respondent had no control over the steering and self-confidence was lacking and that such a driver could not be permitted to play with the lives of the passengers. It would, however, it directed, be proper to engage the first respondent in the workshop or any other place.

4. At