1. THIS Rule is directed against an order of the 6th Industrial Tribunal, dated 6.6.66 (Ann. J to the petition) by which he rejected the application of the petitioner company for approval of the action of the petitioner dismissing their employee, opposite party No. 3 hereinafter referred to as "mukherjee" ).

2. THE facts stated in the petition as to the dismissal are: On 19.12.65, a co-employee of Mukherjee, named Tapser Ali noticed mukherjee to put a small cloth bundle inside the 'dynamo light' of his "bicycle and tapser Ali informed Head Time Keeper who, in his turn, instructed the Jamadar at the gate and at 5.20 p. m. when mukherjee was going out of the gate, he was caught red-handed with four pieces of bearings concealed in the dynamo light of his cycle, A charge under section 14 (c) (iii) of the Standing Orders was drawn up (Ann. B) and served upon Mukherjee and he was suspended. Mukherjee submitted his defence on 18. 12. 65 (Ann. C ).

An inquiry was thereafter held by the Asstt. Manager of the Company on the said charge of 'theft' which is a 'misconduct' under the Standing Orders and at the inquiry, Mukherjee was found guilty of the charge (Ann. E) and by the letter