JUDGMENT Amareshwar Sahay, J. 1. In the present writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the award dated 28.11.1984 passed by the respondent No. 2 in Reference Case No. 11 of 1987. 2. In view of the order which I propose to pass it is not necessary to state the facts of this case in detail. 3. Suffice is to say that vide notification No. IV/D2- 7027/87L&E-1301, dated 15.9.1987 a reference was made to the Industrial Tribunal, Ranchi for adjudication to the effect that "what should be the pay scales and pay structure of the workmen of various units of MICA Trading Corporation of India Limited situated in the State of Bihar and on what base they are entitled to get their dearness allowance ?" 4. Both parties filed their written statements before the Tribunal and led evidence in respect of their claims. The learned Industrial Tribunal though has passed a long order/award but from paragraph 15 and concluding portion of paragraph 32 of the award it appears that the learned Tribunal has totally misdirected itself in not answering the reference which was made to it. In paragraph 15 of the said award the learned Tribunal framed two points for consideration :-- (I) Whether the present reference is or is not maintainable and bad in law ? (II) Whether the management is or is not in a position to pay the concerned productive staff pay scale and D.A. at least at par with the non-production staff w.e.f. 1979 with all arrears of wages and consequential benefits? Accordingly, in closing paragraph 32 of his award the learned Tribunal has come to the following finding :-- "I am of the considered opinion that the management is not in a position to pay the concerned productive staff pay scale and D.A. at least at par with the non-productive staff w.e.f. 1979 with all arrears of wages and consequential benefits and that also in the circumstances when" certain workmen have admittedly taken voluntary retirement. Accordingly, I find and hold that the management is not in a position to pay the concerned productive staff pay scale and D.A. at least at par with the non-productive staff w.e.f. 1979 with all arrears of wages and consequential benefits. Hence this point is answered accordingly." 5. Mrs. Accordingly, I find and hold that the management is not in a position to pay the concerned productive staff pay scale and D.A. at least at par with the non-productive staff w.e.f. 1979 with all arrears of wages and consequential benefits. Hence this point is answered accordingly." 5. Mrs. M.M, Pal learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the learned Industrial Tribunal has absolutely gone wrong in not answering the reference and therefore, on this ground alone the award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be set-aside. 6. On the other hand Mr. Roy Shivaji Nath learned Sr. counsel appearing for the respondent has tried to support the award and the finding of the learned Industrial Tribunal on the ground that the points formulated for determination by the Tribunal and finding arrived at by it were on the basis of the pleadings of the parties. Mr. Nath has raised several other points on the merit of the case and had cited decisions in support by it. But it is not necessary to deal with those points in view of the order and directions which is being passed by me, without going into the merit of this case of either party. 7. On consideration of the rival contention of the parties on the point I am of the view that the learned Industrial Tribunal has committed grave error in not answering the reference made to it and by giving a finding regarding the capacity of the management to meet the demand of the workmen, he has totally misdirected himself and has gone beyond the reference, therefore the award cannot be sustained. 8. Without going into the merit of the case of either party, the Impugned award is hereby set aside, solely on the ground that the Industrial Tribunal has not answered the reference made to it and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh decisions on the reference made to it, after hearing both the parties and on the basis of the materials already on record. 9. Since this matter is quite old, therefore, Tribunal is directed to dispose of the same as directed above within the period of four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 10. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.