AMITAVA LALA, J. ( 1 ) IT appears to this Court that in the earlier occasion a writ petition was moved, being w. P. No. 4120 (W) of 2002 when a Bench of this Court held that there was a violation of condition of the tripartite settlement by the workers in terms of Section 29 of the Industrial disputes Act. Therefore, the Government is supposed to make a reference under Section 34 of such Act, which had been done. ( 2 ) IN disposing of the writ petition, the court held that the appropriate Governmental authority will consider the point and hear out the matter in accordance with law. The Special secretary, Labour Department, Government of west Bengal, has passed a reasoned order which is impugned herein. There, the authority has taken a very peculiar stand, namely, when the strike has been called off, subsequently, there is no necessity of adjudication by thetribunal. But the question germane for the purpose is when there was a tripartite settlement in the public utility service, there should not be any existence of strike. In fact, this is also the observation of such authority, which is as follows:"upon such notice by the management, there was a strike by the workmen with effect from march 11, 2002, which has, however, been withdrawn by the workmen with effect from april 26, 2002. In this connection, it may be mentioned that since the settlement dated january 5, 2002, was a tripartite settlement signed by the management and majority of the central trade unions, it is a valid settlement under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes act and since it is a tripartite settlement, it is binding on all the workmen and their employer (s ). " ( 3 ) ADDITIONALLY, such authority observed that the problem lies in the implementation of the tripartite settlement regarding the productivity linked wages. The problem lies in the fulfilment of norms of production agreed by and between the parties, vide the bipartite agreement dated November 27, 1998. According to such authority, since he is not a technical person, he is not competent to make any comment on such norms. Even thereafter, such authority held that the tripartite settlement dated January 5, 2002, being a valid one under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, and also held the same as binding on all workmen and employers. According to such authority, since he is not a technical person, he is not competent to make any comment on such norms. Even thereafter, such authority held that the tripartite settlement dated January 5, 2002, being a valid one under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, and also held the same as binding on all workmen and employers. It cannot be said that there cannot be any enforcement of the provisions of settlement relating to productivity linked wages, but such implementation of the settlement and the same should not be in isolation of the settlement. It should be implemented in toto by all the parties. Ultimately, it was observed that both the management and the operating unions will sit across the table by bipartite level to sort out the problems by taking a pragmatic approach, for the purpose of implementation on the terms of the tripartite settlement dated January 5, 2002. ( 4 ) HOWEVER, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the earlier agreement dated November 27, 1998, was a bipartite agreement, which includes the productivity linked wages and the same was followed by a tripartite agreement dated january 5, 2002. Therefore, the productivity linked wages was part and parcel of the agreement. Having so, it has to be implemented but when the same was tried to be implemented, the strike was called which will also be declared as illegal. However, legality or illegality is to be determined by the Tribunal, provided the governmental authority has taken step for the purpose of referring the matter to the Tribunal. Not having done so, the authority concerned committed an error for which a judicial review of the writ Court is necessary. ( 5 ) ALTHOUGH the directions were obtained, no affidavit has been filed. Therefore, the appropriate reference will be made by the governmental authority to the Tribunal for the purpose of due consideration of the matter. The writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: (A) The Governmental authority will make a reference incorporating all the specific issues without making any vagueness in such issues, which may cause delay in settling the disputes before the Tribunal. (B) The matter will be forwarded to the appropriate Industrial Tribunal within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order positively. (B) The matter will be forwarded to the appropriate Industrial Tribunal within a period of one month from the date of communication of this order positively. Having been referred, it will be expeditiously heard by the appropriate industrial Tribunal, which is the sincere desire of this Court. Thus, the writ petition is disposed of. ( 6 ) NO order is passed as to costs. ( 7 ) LET xeroxed certified copy of this judgment >e supplied to the parties by the department within seven days from the date of putting in requisition for drawing up and completion of the order as well as the certified copy thereof.