ORDER This writ application was filed against the Order No. 13 dated 8.7.87, whereby the learned Judge of the Third Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, rejected the petition of the petitioner dated 26.5.87, for hearing the preliminary points in the said proceeding. 2. In this case, the issues that were referred to the Tribunal were :– “Whether the workmen belonging to the State Category of both units of the Company (Salkia Works & Port Engineering Works) are entitled to the wage increase of Rs. 65/- as per the Fourth Engg. Wage Settlement of West Bengal? To what relief, if any, are the workmen entitled ?” “3. In the said application dated 26.5.87 praying for hearing of the preliminary points, the petitioner stated that there were valid tripartite settlements dated 30483 and 26.6,83, whereby the workmen concerned were not entitled to any increase in their wages. It was further stated that so long as the said settlements were remaining valid the particular issue referred to the Tribunal could not be raised or decided. This preliminary issue, according to the petitioner, should be disposed of by the Tribunal inasmuch as if it is ultimately found that there are valid settlements which disentitles the workmen concerned to meet any increase in their wages, in that event the issue referred to the Tribunal would not be maintainable and consequently, the Tribunal would have no jurisdiction to decide the reference in question. On the contrary, according to the petitioner, if it is found that there were to valid settlements existing, in that event the Tribunal would have jurisdiction to decide the issue. 4. In any event, the preliminary issue as raised by the petitioner is an issue which bas got to be decided first and the fate of the reference is depending upon determination of the preliminary issue. The Tribunal unfortunately rejected the prayer of the petitioner on the ground that the preliminary issue was so closely knitted that it would be inconvenient to dispose of the preliminary issue; rather it would be easier to take up and dispose of the entire matter in one stroke, if all the points were taken up together. In this connection, the Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in D.P. Maheswari’s case, reported in 1983 (II) LLJ 425 . 5. In this connection, the Tribunal also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in D.P. Maheswari’s case, reported in 1983 (II) LLJ 425 . 5. That is a case of industrial dispute concerning dismissal or concerning imposition of major penalties, In my view, the proposition laid down by the Supreme Court in the above case does not apply to the facts of the present case, inasmuch as this is not a case where if the preliminary issue is decided first it will bring misery to the workmen. Further the Supreme Court observed that ordinarily the Industrial Tribunal should not entertain the preliminary point and should try to dispose of the main matter. Supreme Court did not lay down that in all cases this will be followed. Here the question is whether the workmen would be entitled to an increase of Rs. 65/- in their wages or not. I am unable to uphold the finding of the learned Judge of the Third Industrial that this would bring misery to the workmen and/or that the issue is closely knitted with the main issue. In any event such a preliminary issue has to be decided at the first instance. 6. Accordingly, the order passed by the learned, Judge of Third Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, being Order No. 13 dated 8.7.87, is set aside and the learned Judge of the said Tribunal is directed to dispose of the preliminary issue raised by the petitioner first as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law, but not later than a period of six weeks from date. The parties agree that they will not take adjournment before the said Tribunal except under extraordinary circumstances. 7. I make it clear that I have not made any determination as to the merits of the rival contentions of the parties, which are left open. This writ application is disposed of. All parties to act on a signed copy of operative part of the Dictated Order upon usual undertaking. Impugned order set aside; direction given to dispose of the preliminary issue first.