JUDGMENT :

A.S. SUPEHIA, J.

1. Rule. Learned advocate Mr. Munshaw waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent.

Learned advocate Mr. T.R. Mishra has submitted that the petitioner, on realising that the corporation has engaged some workers after his termination immediately raised industrial dispute in the year 2014. Learned advocate Mr. Mishra has placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Brahmbhatt Jayesh Bhupatray vs. State of Gujarat rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1554 of 2018 dated 13.03.2019, in support of his submission that the Reference cannot be rejected on the ground of delay. It is submitted that the Reference could not have been rejected on the day when violation of Section 25(F) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short “I.D. Act”) is proved.

2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Munshaw has submitted that the industrial dispute raised after a delay of 14 years and hence, the Labour Court has precisely rejected the reference. He has submitted that even as per the statement of claim made by the petitioner workman, he was orally terminated on 03.10.1999, whereas the reference has been filed in the year 2014. In support of h