Judgment:
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.11.2002 passed in CWJC No. 2746 of 1997(R), whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition and affirmed the award passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 14/94.
2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.
Altogether four persons represented through the Union raised the Industrial Disputes on the ground inter-alia that although they have been working since, 1976 in the Central Mine Planning & Design Institute (CMPDI) but their services have not been regularized.
The Central Government, Ministry of Labour referred the following matter to the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal for adjudication.
Whether the action of the management of Central Mine Planning and Design Institute Ltd., Regional Institute No. IL P.O. Koyla Nagar, Dist. Dhanbad in not regularizing/absorbing S/Sri P.K. Barat, Hare Ram Pandey as Electrician, Shri A.K. Banerjee as Water Carrier and Shri Janardan Prasad Singh as Category-I Mazdoor is justified and if not, to what relief the workmen concerned are entitled and from what date?
3. The tribunal after considering the entire facts of the case and the evidence adduced by the parties came to the conclusion that the relationship between the employer and employee exists and that they have been working since 1986. The Tribunal, therefore, held that the services of the concerned workmen are to be regularized. The appellant, being aggrieved by the said party preferred the Writ Petition being C.W.J.C No. 2746 of 1997 R. The learned Single Judge after re-appreciation of the facts and the evidence brought on record affirmed the finding recorded by the tribunal and consequently the writ petition was dismissed then this appeal.
3. The appeal was heard on 4.12.2008 and this Court, after prima facie, coming to a finding that the concerned workmen worked, directed the parties to file affidavits as to whether the concerned workmen are still working in the employment of the appellant (CMPDI).
4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the affidavits have been filed. In the affidavit filed by the concerned workmen, a series of document (Gate Pass) have been annexed showing that still the concerned workmen have been working in the appellant (CMPDI) on the other hand the appellant has filed affidavit denying and disputing the contention of the respondent that they have still been working.
5. It is well settled that normally the award of the Industrial Tribunal cannot be interfered with by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India unless it appears that there is gross error and perversity in the award. Admittedly, finding of fact was recorded by the tribunal and the learned Single Judge after re-appreciation of the entire facts and evidence affirmed the findings of the tribunal. In our considered opinion, this court of appeal cannot re-appreciate facts and counter statement made by the parties and to arrive at fresh conclusion as to whether the concerned employees are still working. Since the learned Single Judge after re-appreciation of the facts and evidence, affirmed the order of the tribunal, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned Judgment and award passed by the learned Single Judge.
6. For the reasons aforesaid, there is no merit in this appeal which is, accordingly, dismissed.