HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.S. APPA RAO W.P.No. 28423 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the order, dated 19-10-2010 passed in I.D.No.9 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-Additional Labour Court, Hyderabad, and to quash the same holding as illegal and perverse. 2. As seen from the record, the petitioner is a company and the second respondent joined as a Stenographer on 21-08-2000 in the petitioner-company and he was transferred to Delhi by order dated 05-08-2002 and inspite of giving several opportunities, he failed to join the service at the transferred place, thereby disobeyed the orders of the petitioner-company. Therefore, a show cause notice was issued to him, for which he submitted explanation and as the same was found to be unsatisfactory, an enquiry officer was appointed to conduct enquiry, before whom the second respondent appeared and sought to take assistance of the Advocate in the enquiry, however the same was rejected by the enquiry officer. Thereafter, the second respondent participated in the enquiry and cross-examined the witnesses and also gave his evidence. The record further discloses that the second respondent, without reporting for duty at the transferred place, filed M.P.No.26 of 2007 before the first respondent claiming salary and the said application was dismissed. On receipt of the enquiry officer’s report, a show cause notice was issued to the second respondent calling for his objections on which he submitted objections and the same were found to be unsatisfactory, and hence, by order dated 29-12-1995, the second respondent was dismissed from service. Aggrieved by the same, the second respondent filed I.D.No.9 of 2010 before the Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-Additional Labour Court, Hyderabad, under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, seeking to set aside the dismissal order and for his reinstatement with back wages and other benefits. The Labour Court, through the order dated 19-10- 2010, invalidated the domestic enquiry conducted by the petitioner- company on the ground that the request of the second respondent to take assistance of the advocate was denied by the Enquiry Officer. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner-company filed the present writ petition as stated above. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, while placing reliance on the decision reported in FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA v. BANT SINGH [1], contended that a legal practitioner is prohibited to appear before the disciplinary authority, and in the present case on hand also, the same was followed by the enquiry officer and therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable. 4. Now the point for consideration is whether the impugned order, dated 19-10-2010 is sustainable? 5. Though the second respondent filed a detailed counter, however, in view of his participation in the enquiry and cross- examination of the witnesses and also giving evidence before the enquiry officer, it can be said, without any slightest doubt, that no prejudice has been caused to him by denying the assistance of the Advocate in the enquiry. It is also borne out from the record that the age of superannuation of the employees in the petitioner-company is 58 years and the second respondent filed the application after attaining the age of 60 years. The Apex Court in the decision referred above also held that a regular practitioner is prohibited to appear before the disciplinary authority. 6. Therefore, in any view of the matter, the conduct of the second respondent in disobeying the orders of his employer and filing the petition at a belated stage, that too after crossing the age of superannuation, in my view, is only unlawful action without having any substantial basis. Hence, the impugned order, dated 19-10-2010, invalidating the domestic enquiry conducted by the petitioner- company, is not sustainable and the same is contrary to law, and liable to be set aside. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed at the admission stage, and the order dated 19-10-2010 in I.D.No.9 of 2010 is set aside. No costs. _______________ K.S. APPA RAO, J Date: 07-12-2011 YCR [1] (1997) 6 SCC 380