Paresh Upadhyay, J.

Challenge in this petition is made by the Employer to the award passed by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad in Reference (T) No. 358 of 2004 dated 29.11.2014. By the impugned award, the Labour Court has held that, (i) the respondent No.1 herein was 'workman' within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and (ii) the allegations levelled against him by the Employer, in the discharge letter dated 18.12.2003, were not proved. Consequently, the Labour Court has directed that the respondent be reinstated in service, with continuity, with 40% back wages.

2. Mr. K.S. Nanavati, learned senior advocate for the petitioner Employer has submitted that, the respondent was not the workman within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and therefore no relief could have been granted by the Labour Court. It is submitted that this point was specifically agitated before the Labour Court as preliminary issue, the Labour Court had even framed this issue as the first issue, however, it has held that the respondent was workman within the meaning of the Act and ultimately the award is passed. It is submitted that, it was for the res