SENGUPTA, J.

(1) This appeal is arising out of a judgment and order of dismissal of writ petition of the learned Single Judge dated 24th March, 2006. The short fact of the case leading to preferring this appeal is set out hereunder:-

(2) One Aijuddin Sheikh, since deceased, being predecessor in interest of the respondent No. 3 (a), (b), (c) and (d) was an employee in the capacity of Tractor Driver of the appellant. While he was in duty he was charge-sheeted on or about 21st June, 1996 alleging against him having committed theft of 3 kgs. of brush dust belonging to appellant and at the same time he was asked to show cause as to why he should not be terminated from his services. On service of the said charge-sheet he was placed under suspension from his service. Thereafter, he had shown-cause in writing explaining the entire incident and pleaded not guilty and denied the allegations of misconduct.

(3) The management/appellant however, having not been satisfied with the explanation conducted a domestic/internal enquiry by appointing it labour officer as enquiry officer to hold enquiry. Thereafter enquiry was held on notice being served upon the said deceased employee. It appears in course of enquiry proceeding the said labour welfare officer was replaced by another officer to continue with enquiry. The Enquiry Officer submitted report holding him guilty of charges. The appellant company had accepted the report. By an order dated 13th September, 1996 the deceased employee was dismissed from services by the appellant company on acceptance of report. On receipt of the said order of dismissal the said deceased employee raised industrial dispute and the same was referred to the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Krishnanagar, Nadia for intervention and taking necessary steps. Conciliation proceeding was initiated by the said Commissioner, however, it was proved to be futile exercise as there was no settlement. Finally the appropriate Government referred the following dispute to the first respondent, the learned Judge VIII Industrial Tribunal:-(i) Whether the management is justified in terminating the employment of Aijuddin Sheikh. (ii) The relief, if any, is he entitled to.

(4) The learned Tribunal on receipt of the written submission of the workman and counter-statement of the said company and having examined witnesses came to fact finding that by an order dated 19th December, 2000, the enquiry proceeding held by the management company was not in accordance with law and the same is conducted in complete breach of principle of natural justice, as such the report of the Enquiry Officer was set aside. However, by the same very judgment and order the learned Tribunal decided to hear out the matter on merit upon giving chance to the management company to prove the charges levelled against the workman by adducing evidence by witness action. The company, cited three witnesses to prove the charges of theft levelled against the said deceased employee. After analysing evidence and going through the facts and circumstances of the case made out by both the parties the Tribunal held that proof of theft was missing and as such the said deceased employee was given benefit of doubt consequently he was not found guilty of the allegations levelled against him. Naturally order of dismissal was set aside and direction was given to reinstate the deceased employee in services of the company with full back wages.

(5) The company thereafter filed the said writ petition challenging the said award of the learned 8th Industrial Tribunal. During pendency of the above writ petition the said workman died intestate and by an order dated 22nd April, 2003 the learned trial Judge recorded the death of the said deceased employee and the present respondent No. 3 (a), (b), (c) and (d) were brought on record. The learned trial Judge dismissed the writ petition by the impugned judgment and order dated 24th March, 2006 upheld the said award and dismissed the writ pet