It is that judgment and order of the Division Bench, which is under challenge in this appeal.
1.7.1992 is justified?
If number, to what relief the workmen are entitled?
The appellant is the employer and 28 of its workmen are represented by respondent No.2.
The facts giving rise to this appeal lie in a short companypass.
The parties are, hereafter, referred to as the employer and the workmen respectively.
LITTTTTTJ J U D G M E N T Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. Leave is granted.
The validity of that award was assailed by the appellant before the High Court at Patna Ranchi Bench in CWJC No.2406 of 1979 R .
The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, referred the following question under Section 10 1 d of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for short, the I.D. Act to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.2 at Dhanbad for short, the Tribunal , Whether the action of the management of Central Mine Planning Design Institute Ltd., Ranchi in terminating the services of Shri Naresh Jha and 27 others as per annexure w.e.f.
On May 1, 1997 the Tribunal passed the award holding that the termination of 28 workmen was number justified and that they were entitled to reinstatement and regularisation with 40 back wages and other benefits.
This appeal is from the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, Ranchi Bench, in L.P.A.No.177 of 1999 R dated August 9, 1999.
