JUDGEMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 29-07-2024 The appeal is against the judgment of the learned Single Judge refusing to interfere with the award of the Labour Court, which was challenged in the writ petition. We heard Sri P.K. Verma, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant-Corporation, and Mr. Daya Nath Thakur, learned Counsel for the party respondents.

2. The allegation of misconduct, on which the 3rd respondent was dismissed from service, was of unauthorized absence; specifically of 129 days. The Labour Court considered the question on a reference made by the Government under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The Labour Court, by order dated 17.08.2007 found the enquiry to be vitiated as being unfair. The said order on the preliminary objection has not been challenged in the writ petition. It is trite that the employer who conducts a domestic enquiry and imposes a punishment is not required to challenge the preliminary order passed by the Labour Court;

on a reference made by the State Government under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, before the final award is passed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court