Short Note : 1. The respondent was given adequate opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses and he chose not to put any questions in cross-examinations and on the basis of this material the learned Labour Judge found that the inquiry was in order as the only allegation against the inquiry made by the respondent was not correct as he was given adequate opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses examined during the inquiry. This apparently is a finding of fact and it could not be disputed that in a revision petition under section 66 of the Act finding of fact could not be interfered with. The learned President, Industrial Court, therefore, held that the finding is perverse. But in view of the material discussed above it is not possible to accept that the finding, arrived at by the Labour Judge was perverse. The material cannot justify the inference. Consequently the learned President of the Industrial Court could not interfere with the findings arrived at by the learned Labour Judge and in so doing he has exceeded the jurisdiction vested in him by law. Petition allowed.