JUDGMENT : R.M. LODHA, J. 1. Heard. 2. By means of this writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the Petitioner prays that the order passed by the Central Government on January 18, 1995 refusing to refer the industrial dispute for adjudication u/s 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 be set aside. 3. The short facts necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are: "The Petitioner, Bombay Port Trust Employees' Union (for short 'Union') served a strike notice on the Chairman, Bombay Dock Labour Board (Respondent No.2 herein) pressing for the demand that promotional post of Tindel in chipping and painting Section should be filled from amongst the mazdoors of the said Section on the basis of their seniority as per the practice and any action of the second Respondent and Respondent No. 4 herein viz. Secretary, Chipping and Painting Employees Association Private Limited depriving senior mazdoors of their right to promotional post of tindel be held illegal and unjustified. The Conciliation Officer and Asst. Commissioner of Labour, Bombay held conciliation proceedings on August 4, 1993 and ultimately on March 13, 1994 the Conciliation Officer submitted failure report to the Central Government. By the order dated January 18, 1995 Central Government refused to refer the industrial dispute for adjudication on the ground that it did not find the proposed dispute fit for reference for adjudication. The relevant part of the order dated January 18, 1995 reads thus: "the Central Government, having considered the said report, in terms of Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is of the opinion that the dispute is not fit for reference to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication on the following grounds: "It is reported that the Transport and Dock Workers Union which represents the majority of the registered Chipping and Painting Workers are supporting the action taken by the Administrative Body. It is also reported that as per the Bombay Chipping and Painting Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1969, seniority, merit, fitness for work and record of past service are the factors to be taken into consideration for promotion." 4. It is also reported that as per the Bombay Chipping and Painting Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme, 1969, seniority, merit, fitness for work and record of past service are the factors to be taken into consideration for promotion." 4. It is well settled that while exercising the power u/s 12(5) of the I.D. Act, 1947, the appropriate Government cannot go into the merits of the industrial dispute and if it finds that the industrial dispute arises, then such industrial dispute needs to be referred for adjudication to the competent Tribunal. 5. In the present case, the observation made by the Central Government that dispute is not fit for reference cannot be sustained. 6. Accordingly, writ petition deserves to be allowed and it is made absolute in terms of prayers (a) and (b) which read thus (except bracketed portion): "(a) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for the records of the case from the First Respondent, Union of India, Ministry of Labour and after going through the legality and propriety of the same, set aside and quash the order dated January 18, 1995 (Exhibit 'D'). (b) that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the First Respondent to refer for adjudication u/s 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the dispute covered by the Notice of Strike dated July 26, 1993 given by the Petitioner (and also direct the First Respondent to decide the complaint dated October 20, 1993 filed before the Conciliation Officer u/s 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947)."