S.R. BRAHMBHATT, J.

1. Heard learned Advocates for the parties. The petitioner-Second Party workmen in Reference (IT) No. 400 of 1990 from the Court of Industrial Tribunal, Gujarat Ahmedabad, have approached this Court invoking provisions of Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the award and order dated 8.1.1998 passed by the Industrial Tribunal rejecting the Reference for the reasons stated thereunder.

2. Facts in brief deserve to be set out as under: The petitioners were constrained to raise Industrial Disputes as lockout declared by the respondent from 16.1.1990 was illegal and for seeking reinstatement of 20 workmen on the original post with full back wages. The reason for imposing lockout was allegation of deliberate go slow policy adopted by the workmen with ulterior motive. The said dispute was referred to the competent Court i.e. Industrial Tribunal, wherein, it was marked as Reference (IT) No. 400 of 1990. The Tribunal after elaborate discussion of the evidences adduced on record, came to the conclusion that Reference did not merit acceptance and hence rejected the same vide award and order dated 8.1.1998, which is impugned in this petition