ORDER :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

The appellant is in appeal against the order dated 7th March 2018 passed in W.P.(L) No. 6964 of 2012 whereby the award made by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.I, Dhanbad in Reference No.43 of 2010 has been set-aside by the writ Court.

2. Briefly stated, Shyam Lal B.P was appointed on 20th November 1974 as casual worker in Tapin South Colliery. The appellant faced an enquiry on the allegation that impersonating himself as Shyam Lal B.P who had died on 19th July 1976 he continued to work in his place and thereby committed gross misconduct. A charge-memo was served upon the appellant on a similar allegation indicating therein that the death certificate issued by the Station Officer, Jaijaipur PS, district-Bilaspur, (M.P) confirmed the death of Shyam Lal B.P on 19th July 1976 which was further confirmed by elder brother of the deceased employee and Sarpanch of village Taldeori. In the departmental enquiry against the appellant, G. C. Prasad and U. K. Tripathy tendered materials which were collected by them during the preliminary enquiry by visiting the village of Shyam Lal B.P. A copy of the complaint vide Ext.-ME-1 and the application made for obtaining the death certificate vide Ext.-ME-16 were laid in evidence. The witnesses stated before the enquiring officer as regards statement of the elder brother of Shyam Lal B.P and Sarpanch of village Taldeori who confirmed the death of Shyam Lal B.P on 19th July 1976. During the preliminary enquiry the photograph of the appellant was shown to the elder brother of the deceased employee who affirmed that the same was not the photograph of his brother Shyam Lal B.P and a statement to this effect was made by the management witnesses before the enquiring officer.

3. In the departmental enquiry the appellant did not participate inspite of notice issued to him by the enquiring officer on 25th September 1999. The enquiry against the appellant therefore continued ex-parte and a report finding the charges proved against the appellant was submitted by the enquiring officer. Finally by an order dated 25th September 2000 the appellant was dismissed from service.

4. An industrial dispute was raised by the workman which on failure of the conciliation was referred for adjudication by the Central Government in exercise of the powers under section 10(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in the following terms:

“Whether the action of the management of Tapin South Colliery of M/s. C.C. Ltd. to dismiss the service of Shri Shyam Lal B.P is legal and justified? If not to what relief is the workman concerned entitled?”

5. In Reference No. 43 of 2010, on behalf of the management the enquiring officer was produced as MW1 on 18th March 2008. As WW1, the workman examined himself on 19th June 2008 in support of his case.

6. By an order dated 3rd August 2011, the Tribunal returned a finding that the domestic enquiry conducted against the workman was fair and proper.

7. Having held so, the Tribunal proceeded to examine legality of the dismissal order with reference to the witnesses produced by both sides and came to a conclusion that without examining the complainant on oath and in absence of a report by the handwriting expert the enquiring officer could not have come to a conclusion that the workman impersonated himself in place of Shyam Lal B.P and as a sequel to this the management could not have dismissed him from service on such charge.

8. M/s Central Coalfields Limited (in short, CCL) challenged award dated 7th February 2012 passed in Reference No. 43 of 2010 inter alia on the grounds that (i) the findings recorded in the departmental enquiry cannot be challenged except where the findings are perverse and (ii) the Tribunal cannot act as appellate authority sitting over the judgment of the departmental authority.

9. In support of the award dated 7th February 2012, the workman took a stand that even though the domestic enquiry conducted by CCL is held fair and proper the fi