ORDER :

C.M. Poonacha, J.

The above Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

"A) Set aside the Impugned Order 23 November 2018 passed by the Learned Presiding Officer, Principal Labour Court, Bengaluru in I.D. 29/2016, in relation to the Impugned Order ('Annexure A');

B) Answer the Preliminary Issue in the positive and thus hold that the domestic enquiry conducted by the Petitioner against the Respondnt was fair and proper and consequently issue directions to Hon'ble Labour Court, to rely on the findings of the Enquiry Committee regarding the termination of the services of the Respondent and also the evidence adduced before the Enquiry Committee.

C) Pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem necessary in the interest of justice and equity."

2. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Respondent - Workman was employed with the Petitioner - Company as "Software Product Support Engineer - I" on 13.9.2010. That in 2014 the Company began to notice a significant decrease in the work out put of the Workman as well as the change in his attitude. On 31.8.2015 the Petitioner issued a charge sheet-cum-show cause notice to the Workman.

3. On 3.9.2015 the Workman acknowledged receipt of the show cause notice and requested for additional period to submit his reply. On 16.10.2015 as requested by the Workman, the Company furnished copies of the Employees Disciplinary Action Note dated 6.5.2015 and e-mail dated 10.7.2015. On 22.10.2015 the Workman requested for a copy of the Work Performance Rules of the Company and additional time of two weeks to respond to the charge sheet. On 17.11.2015 the Company furnished a copy of the Work Performance Rules and called upon the workman to reply to the charge sheet within 7 working days. By letter dated 25.11.2015 the Workman, inter alia, sought for additional time to submit his reply. On 10.12.2015 the Company addressed a letter to the Workman notifying about the Enquiry Committee constituted and the first hearing of the enquiry.

4. On 16.12.2015 the Enquiry Committee held its first hearing and on the said date the Workman furnished a letter in the course of the enquiry proceedings as his response to the charge sheet-cum-show cause notice dated 31.8.2015 issued by the Company. On 6.1.2016 the Company notified the Workman about the second sitting of the Enquiry Committee to be held on 14.1.2016. On 14.1.2016 the Enquiry Committee held its second and final hearing, on which date the Workman had also submitted another letter denying the charges levelled against him. On 11.2.2016 the Enquiry Committee gave its reply and on 23.3.2016 the Company issued a letter of termination of the services to the Workman.

5. Being aggrieved by his termination, the Workman filed a claim under Section 10 (4A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the 'ID Act') in ID No.29/2016 before the Principal Labour Court, Bengaluru, wherein the Company entered appearance and filed its response. On 23.1.2017 issues were framed by the Labour Court in which issue No.1 was treated as a preliminary issue as to whether the domestic enquiry was fair and proper. On 23.11.2018 the Labour Court held the preliminary issue/issue No.1 in the negative and against the Company. Being aggrieved, the Company filed the present Writ Petition.

6. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner - Company that the Workman was duly notified of the charges and was given sufficient opportunity to respond to the same; that the Company be