S.K.Chattopadhyaya, J.

1. In C.W.J.C. No. 1101 of 1989, the Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Supply Workers Union is the petitioner which has challenged the order dated November 17, 1989, as contained in Annexure - 1, passed by respondent No. 1 the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Patna, by reason of which respondent No. 1 has retained, deleted and modified some of the clauses in the Standing Order. In C.W.J.C. No. 3396 of 1989, on the other hand, the Bihar State Electricity Board through its Secretary as petitioner has challenged the order dated August 21, 1987, passed by the Certifying Officer under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946, respondent No. 2 as well as the judgment of the appellate authority dated November 17, 1988 as contained in Annexure to this application whereas Bihar Pradesh Vidyut Shramik Sangh through its Secretary has been made as respondent No. 5 in both the writ applications.

2. As facts in both the cases are common, it is desirable to mention the case of the parties in nutshell.

It appears that Bihar Rajya Vidyut Parishad Field Kamgar Union respondent No. 4 in C.W.J.C. No. 1101 of 1989 and respondent No. 3 in C.W.J.C.No. 3396 of 1989 (hereinafter referred to as Kamgar Union) filed an application before the respondent No. 2 under Sec. 10 of the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for modification of certified Standing Orders of the Bihar State Electricity Board (in short the Board). On receipt of such application, respondent No. 2 issued notices to the Board as well as the registered Trade Unions, inviting objection thereto. The Board filed its objection against three items, namely, promotion, transfer and suspension in the proposed modification. The petitioner union filed its objection against the proposed modification and submitted its proposal for modifications with respect to promotion, suspension and transfer. After considering the objection and hearing the parties, the respondent No. 2 certified the Standing Order of the Board and made provisions with respect of recruitment, promotion, transfer and suspension by its order dated August 21, 1988.

3. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, Board moved the Industrial Tribunal, an appellate authority constituted under the aforesaid Act. It appears that when the appeal was pending, a compromise was entered into between the petitioner Union and the Board. They filed separate applications before the appellate authority with a prayer to dispose of the appeal in terms of the accepted compromise. However, all the parties, except Kamgar Union accepted the said compromise. Rather Kamgar Union opposed the compromise orally without filing any written objection. On such objection being made, the Tribunal decided to dispose of the appeal on merit.

4. It appears after admitting the appeal, notices were sent to two Unions, namely, Bihar State Electricity Supply Workers Union and Bihar Pradesh Vidyut Shramik Sangh and they accordingly participated in the proceeding. When the hearing was taken up, a petition was filed on behalf of the Bihar State Electricity Supply Workers Union through one Chakradhar Prasad Singh for being impleaded as party but the prayer was rejected by the appellate authority.

5. Mr, Sivajee Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner in C.W.J.C.No.llOl of 1989, at threshold had contended that the Act itself contains a schedule with regard to items of service conditions on which the Certifying Officer as well as the appellate authority will have a jurisdiction to certify Standing Order. But either of them cannot go beyond the items mentioned in schedule of Standing Order. It was next contended that the appellate authority was not justified in ignoring the compromise petition only on the objection raised by Kamgar Union and should not have decided the appeal on merit.

From respective plea of the parties, it appears that the petitioner has challenged some parts of t