ANJANI KUMAR, J. ( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. ( 2 ) THE petitioner, aggrieved by an award given by the Labour Court, Meerut in adjudication case no. 100/77 C. A. , approached this court by means of this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India, The following dispute was referred for adjudication to the Labour Court:. . (VERNACULAR MATTER OMMITED ). . ( 3 ) THE Labour Court has held that because of the referring order dated 17. 12. 1974, wherein the dispute has been referred to in the name of the Presiding Officer, Shri S. H. J. Naqvi though the dispute has now been transferred to Labour Court, Meerut, he is of the opinion that he, in the circumstances, since the reference is made in the name of the Presiding Officer, he, the successor of the Labour Court and its Presiding Officer has no jurisdiction to decide the same. ( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this view of the Labour Court is firstly not; supported by. any law and contrary to law sealed by the Apex Court reported in 1982 (45)FLR 183 that the Labour Court is under legal obligation to answer the reference whatsoever, whether it is addressed by name of the Presiding Officer, who was, then presiding the Court or is now transferred to successor Labour Court. In view of the aforesaid settled case, this petition deserves to be allowed. The award of the Labour Court deserves to be quashed and is hereby quashed. The matter is remanded back to the; Labour Court for deciding the same in accordance with law. Since the matter is more than 20 years old. Labour Court is directed to decide the same expeditiously, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order before them. . .