JUDGMENT :

1. Heard.

2. Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the rival parties. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent no.1 waives notice. The respondent no.2 is a formal party.

3. The Petitioner before this Court is the Management and the Respondent no.1 is the employee.

4. This Petition arises out of an order dated 25.10.2018, passed by the Industrial Tribunal and Labour Court, whereby on an application filed by Respondent no.1 under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, (for short, the said Act), it has been held that the Respondent no.1 is a workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the aforesaid Act. It was further held that the charges of misconduct levelled against the Respondent are not proved to the satisfaction of the Tribunal. The further issues framed by the Tribunal pertaining to the entitlement of the Respondent towards reinstatement in service and full back wages and whether the termination of service of the Respondent can be said to be justified, are yet to be decided by the Tribunal. But, the Petitioner has approached this Court to challenge the impugned order, because it is asserted on be