AM Bujor Barua, J.

Heard Mr. PJ Saikia, learned counsel for the appellants and Ms. A Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the respondent, Workman.

2. The Workman, Champak Kumar Bezbaruah, who was serving as Factory Supervisor in the appellant Ghooronia Tea Estate was served with a notice dated 28.06.2000 by the Manager of the Tea Estate requiring him to show cause as to why disciplinary action should not be undertaken on the allegation of misappropriation of green tea leaves. The Workman submitted his reply dated 11.07.2000 to the said show cause. The Management having found the reply to be unacceptable, issued a show cause notice dated 17.07.2000, containing a charge that as per the documentary evidence, the Workman had made incorrect reconciliation of the amount of green tea leaves received from various suppliers and in doing so, a financial loss was caused to the Management to the extent of Rs.68,794/-. It was also charged that the Workman had endorsed the signature of the Manager of the Garden to cover up the act of showing more purchase in the records than what was actually done and in doing so, the Workman had caused a loss of Rs.1,20,780/- in terms of the value of black tea. To such show cause notice of 17.07.2000, the petitioner submitted his reply dated 21.07.2000, wherein he had denied the charges made against him and also sought to give his explanation for the purpose.

3. The Management being not satisfied with the reply of the Workman, informed him by the communication dated 27.07.2000 that a domestic enquiry would be held by an independent person. The Workman by his communication of 11.08.2000 informed the Management that he does not have any witness to be presented in the domestic enquiry, but requested for an opportunity to cross examine the witnesses of the Management, who may depose in the enquiry.

4. In the resultant enquiry a report dated 18.09.2000 was submitted by which the Workman was found guilty of the charges made against him and, in acceptance thereof the Management arrived at a decision to dismiss the Workman. Accordingly, a letter dated 26.09.2000 was served on the Workman requiring him to respond to the said decision of the Management. The Workman, submitted his reply dated 03.10.2000, which was found to be unacceptable by the Management and by its letter dated 09.11.2000, the Workman was informed that he had been dismissed from service and also offered one months salary. The Management also filed an application under Section 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, Act of 1947) seeking approval of the action taken by the Management, which was registered as Case No.6/2000.

5. The Labour Court by the order dated 30.05.2000 arrived at a conclusion that the domestic enquiry was done in compliance of the Principles of Natural Justice and that the Workman had failed to prove that the enquiry was not done by complying with all the requirements and, accordingly, the decision of dismissal was approved.

6. In the resultant situation, the Govt. of Assam in the Labour and Employment Department by the Notification dated 13.02.2003 referred a dispute under Section 10 (1) (c) of the Act of 1947 to the Labour Court, Dibrugarh on the following terms:

"1. Whether the management of Ghooronia Tea Estate is justified in dismissing the service of Shri CK Bazbaruah from his service w.e.f. 09.11.2000?

2. If not, whether he is entitled to re-instatement with all back wages and other benefits in lieu thereof?"

7. In the proceeding before the Labour Court, the records of Case No.6/2000 was also called and by the order dated 14.02.2005, it was held that the domestic enquiry held by the Management was not proper and, accordingly, the Management was allowed to adduce its evidence.

8. The proceeding before the Labour Court was concluded upon passing of the award dated 20.07.2007, by which it was held that the dismissal of the Workman on 09.11.2000 was not justified and that he be reinstated with all b