JUDGMENT :

Ajay Bhanot, J.

1. The petitioner has assailed the award dated 30.7.2020 rendered by the labour Court in adjudication Case No. 16 of 2009 (Satish Kumar v. Regional Manager U.P.S.R.T.C., Saharanpur) deciding the reference against the employer and directing the respondent No. 3 workman to be reinstated in service with continuity of service. The labour Court in the impugned award has held the workman entitled to 50% of the backwages for the period of his termination.

2. The reference before the labour Court was as to whether the termination of services of the respondent No. 3 workman Satish Kumar on 7.5.2005 were valid and legal.

3. Shri Jagram Singh and Shri Rahul Agarwal, learned counsels for the petitioner pointing the fault lines in the award submit that the labour Court neglected to consider the findings returned by the enquiry officer. The labour Court did not return findings on relevant issues upon an independent enquiry while exercising powers under Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act (Section 6(2)(a) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act). The absence of the workman was willful and findings to the contrary in the impugned award are perverse. The punishment was pr