THE HONL’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.22595 OF 2000 Dated: 03.02.2011 Between : 1. The Child Development Project Officer, ICDS Project, G. Madugula., and another. .. Petitioners And 1. Sri Gondhi Bonju Babu and another. .. Respondents THE HONL’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.22595 OF 2000 ORDER : This writ petition is filed seeking a Certiorari to call for the records relating to the Award dated 22.03.2000 made in I.D.No.178 of 1998 on the file of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam and to quash the same being arbitrary and illegal. I.D.No.178 of 1998 was filed by the 1st respondent herein under Section 2-A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 claiming that he was engaged by the petitioners herein as Night Watchman on daily wage basis on 12.3.1990 and his services were terminated illegally. The petition was contested by the writ petitioners alleging that having committed theft on 16.3.1998, he remained absent voluntarily and he was never removed from service. It was also contended that he was a daily wage worker and he did not come within the definition of the workman under Section 2 (s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. On the basis of the pleadings, the Tribunal below formulated the following points for consideration. (1) Whether the management is not an industry and this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this petition? (2) Whether the petitioner voluntarily stopped to attending to duties as contended by the management or whether he was removed from service as contended by the workman? (3) Whether there is justifiable ground for the alleged removal order passed against the workman by the management and if not whether the workman is entitled to reinstatement with back-wages and continuity of service? The workman/1st respondent herein got himself examined as W.W.1 and on behalf of the Management, M.W.1 was examined. Similarly Exs.W-1 to W-5 documents were marked on behalf of the workman, whereas Exs.M-1 to M-6 documents were marked on behalf of the management. On appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal below held that the management was an industry and though the workman was guilty of misconduct in not discharging his duties properly, the punishment of removal was unwarranted. Accordingly by Award dated 22.03.2000, while directing reinstatement with continuity of service, it was held that he was not entitled for back-wages. Aggrieved by the said Award, the present writ petition has been filed by the management. Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties, I do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal which are based on proper appreciation of the evidence available on record. Absolutely no case could be made out by the petitioner to show that the impugned Award suffered from an error of jurisdiction or error of law apparent on the face of the record. Hence, the interference by this Court in exercise of Certiorari jurisdiction is not warranted and accordingly the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 03.02.2011 gbs