( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) BY consent of learned counsel for the parties, this appeal was heard finally.

( 3 ) HAVING heard learned counsel for the parties we find that the Labour court having held in case of the appellant whose services were terminated on 30/9/1981, that Section 25-F of the Industrial Act was violated, was in error in dismissing the reference on the ground of delay as the termination was of 1981 and the dispute was raised in 1989. Similarly, the High court in the impugned judgment committed the same error in confirming the said decision. The reason is obvious. As laid down by this court in the case of Ajaib singh v. Sirhind Co-operative Marketing-cum-Processing service Society ltd. and Anr. , (1996) 6 SCC 82, if the order of dismissal is challenged belatedly, the dispute would still continue for adjudication, the only question would be to deprive back wages for the period of delay in raising such a dispute if on merits it is to succeed. Following, the said decision, therefore, the appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of the High court as well as the Labour court are set aside. The termination of the appellant on 30/9/1981 is held to be bad and set aside. The