WP(C) 6075/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. A. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well a s Mr. LP Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 7. 7.2006 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court in Reference Case No. 13/20 00. For a ready reference the order is quoted below: Seen series of petitions preferred by the Management. It appear s that the Management is not interest to see that the points referred to be deci ded by this Court. Hence, the reference may be returned to the Govt. and accordingl y this reference is disposed of. The particular reference reads as follows: (a) Whether the principles of natural justice was followed in t he conduct of the enquiry by management and whether termination of service based in this enquiry was justified? (b) If not, to what relief (s) the workman is entitled? It is submitted by Mr. A. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitio ner that the reference could not have been answered in the above manner and that the same should have been answered upon adjudication of the same. Mr. LP Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 submits t hat the Management had raised the question of competence and jurisdiction of the Presiding Officer of the Labour Court who has passed the impugned order dated 7 .7.2006. On the face of it, the order dated 7.7.2006 is not sustainable i n the eye of law. Accordingly the same is set aside and quashed and the matter i s remanded back to the Labour Court for adjudication of the aforementioned refer ence. The question of jurisdiction and competence of the particular officer of t he Labour Court as has been raised by the learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 is also kept open for agitation. Since the reference is an old one, it is expected that the Labou r Court will decide the same as expeditiously as possible. Writ petition is disposed of.