D.K. Seth, J.: The Award dated 27th of August, 1998 passed in Reference No.1 of 1992 by the learned Central Government Industrial Tribunal at Calcutta, has since been challenged. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that in the facts and circumstances of this case, the Reference could not be maintained since the case of the workman was not espoused by an Union and as such it was not a dispute within the meaning of section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Secondly, he contends that the respondent No.4 was not a workman and as such there cannot be said to be any dispute existing between the parties. At the same time, it was no a case under section 2(a) and thus no dispute can be raised. It was also contended that the ld. Tribunal having found that the workman had failed to prove that he was a peon which the workman had all throughout been claiming to be, still then the ld. Tribunal had granted the reliefs despite the finding that the workman had been appointed as 'Coolie' (porter) or 'Thelawala' (cart-pullar). Therefore, the reliefs could not have been granted. He also relied on several decisions in support of his contention. According to him, the findi