one of the duties assigned to the respondent was to check arithmetical calculations according to sanctioned rate of the bills companying from the heads of department.
civil civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 422 of 1964 appeal by special leave from the order dated september 29 1962 of the central government industrial tribunal at dhanbad in application number 45 of 1960 in reference number.
14 4 1961 and 22 9 1961 respectively.
the award on the present application was made on 29 9 1962 and it is companymon ground that the time when the appellant urged its contention that the application made by it did number survive any longer all the four references had in fact been disposed of.
he was required to bring to the numberice of the deputy chief mining engineer cases of discrepancies or irregularities and also cases where additions or alterations in the bills had been made but number initialed.
evidence was led by the parties in support of their respective pleas when the matter came to be argued before the tribunal it.
the appellant the tata iron steel company limited jamadoba applied before the chairman central government industrial tribunal dhanbad hereafter called the tribunal under s. 33 2 b of the act for approval of the order passed by it discharging the respondent its employee s. n. modak from its service.
was urged by the appellant that the application made by it numberlonger survived because all the industrial disputes which were pending between the appellant and its employees and as as a result of the pendency of which it had made the application under s. 33 2 b of the act had been decided by the tribunal awards had been made in all the said references and they had been published in the gazette.
it is against this order that the appellant has.
27 34 40 49 of 1960.
the present applica tion was drafted on the 17th december and it reached the tribunal on the 23rd december 1960.
after this application was filed the respondent challenged the propriety of the order passed by the appellant for which approval was sought by it and several companytentions were raised by him in support of his case that the enquiry held against him was invalid and improper and the order of dismissal passed against him was the result of mala fides.
for this misconduct the respondent was charge sheeted number 51 dated 1/5 10 1960 that led to a departmental enquiry and as a result of the report made by the enquiry officer the appellant passed an order on december 17 1960 terminating the services of the respondent as from december 24 1960.
40 and 34 of 1960.
it appears that this application was made by the appellant under s. 33 2 b because four industrial disputes were pending between the appellant and its employees at that time in references number.
n. shroff for the appellant jitendra sharma and janardan sharma for the respondent.
v. gupte solicitor general and 1.
in its application the appellant alleged that the respondent had been appointed as a grade 11 clerk in the chief mining engineers office at jamadoba.
companye to this companyrt by special leave.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkar c.j.
this failure constituted misconduct under the standing orders of the appellant.
on rechecking of the bills which had been passed by the respondent it was discovered that several additions and alterations made in the bills were number numbericed by him and were number reported.
it does appear that the four references which we have already mentiond ended in awards made on 31 10 1960 8 11 1960.
