JUDGMENT 1. - Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, we are of the opinion that no case Is made out for Interfering with the conclusion reached by the learned Single Judge. 2. The dispute relates to finding reached by the Labour Court that alleged misconduct is not proved in the departmental enquiry conducted by the employer. Therefore, termination order could not be sustained. 3. We are of the opinion that the law is now well settled after insertion of Section 11-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 that the Tribunal has necessary jurisdiction to reach its own finding about the alleged misconduct of an incumbent even if it finds enquiry to be valid and substitute its own finding on merit. It is otherwise not permissible prior to insertion of Section 11-A. 4. Reference in this connection may be made to the Workmen of M/s. Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co. of India (Pvt.) Ltd. v. The Management & Ors., (1973) 1 SCC 813 . The apex Court while considering the change in law about the insertion of Section 11 A said : "The legislature in Section 11-A has made a departure in certain respects in the law as laid down by this Court. For the first time, power has been given to a Tribunal to satisfy itself whether misconduct is proved. This is particular so, as already pointed out by us, regarding even findings arrived at by an employer in an enquiry properly held. The Tribunal has also been given power, also for the first time, to interfere with the punishment imposed by an employer." 5. In view thereof, we do not find any merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal having held that the enquiry was properly conducted it ought not to have by appreciating the-evidence, which has come on record during the course of Departmental enquiry, to reach a different conclusion. 6. Accordingly, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.Appeal Dismissed. *******