An industrial tribunal must determine domestic inquiry validity before deciding the merits of dismissal.

The petitioner challenged the respondent company’s termination of his employment, which followed a domestic enquiry.

The Second Industrial Tribunal, by an award dated 18 December 2024, declared the termination and enquiry invalid and ordered reinstatement, back wages and other reliefs.

The company sought review under Rule 27(ii) of the West Bengal Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958.

The Fifth Industrial Tribunal allowed the review, holding that the validity of the domestic enquiry had to be decided before the merits of the dismissal.

The petitioner then challenged that review order in the High Court

1. Whether the Tribunal’s failure to frame and decide an issue concerning the validity of the domestic enquiry, which formed the basis of the dismissal, amounted to an error apparent on the face of the record permitting review under Rule 27(ii)

2. Whether the Fifth Industrial Tribunal’s order allowing review warranted interference by the High Court

Rule 27(ii) of the West Bengal Industrial Disputes Rules, 1958 empowers a Labour Court, Industrial Tribunal or Arbitrator to review an award on the ground of a mistake or error apparent on the face of the record

Where dismissal rests on a domestic enquiry, the Tribunal must address the enquiry’s validity before examining the merits of the dismissal; the Tribunal’s failure to do so may constitute a procedural error apparent on the record

The review Tribunal also relied on *M/s Birla Building Ltd. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.*, WPA 8531 of 2021, concerning the need to examine the validity of a domestic enquiry

The High Court noted that the petitioner’s dismissal was based on a domestic enquiry and that the original Tribunal had not framed an issue on the enquiry’s validity

Although the original award declared the enquiry invalid, it did so without first treating its validity as an issue for adjudication

Because the enquiry was the foundation of the dismissal, the review Tribunal was justified in finding that its validity had to be assessed before the merits of the dismissal.

The High Court therefore considered the review order reasoned and consistent with Rule 27(ii)

Connected applications, if any, were disposed of consequentially