Judgment :- The legality and correctness of the order passed in W.P.No.2953/2005 dated 25.02.2005 is the subject matter of this appeal. 2. The appellant was an employee of Karnataka Agro Industries Corporation Limited. He was dismissed from the service. Contending that dismissal of him from the service is illegal, he approached the Labour Officer and Conciliation Officer, Chamarajanagar. Annexure-A is the application submitted by the appellant before the Conciliation Officer. On 30.11.2004, as per Annexure-B, he directed the appellant to approach the Labour Court and get the claim settled under Section 33(c)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short ‘the Act’) 3. This order was questioned by the appellant by filing a writ petition on the ground that the Conciliation Officer has failed to follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 12 of the Act. The learned Single Judge considering that the dispute is only with regard to payment of arrears of salary and wages has confirmed the order of the Conciliation Officer and dismissed the writ petition. Challenging the legality and correctness of the order of the learned Single Judge the present appeal is filed. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for appellant and the learned Government Advocate for respondent. 5. The main contention of the appellant before us is that the Conciliation Officer as well as the learned Single Judge have committed an error in directing the appellant to approach the labour Court by invoking Section 33(c)(2) of the Act. According to him the appellant had approached the Conciliation Officer on the ground of removing him from the service without conducting proper enquiry as bad in law and therefore, he sought for reinstatement and for other benefits. But, the Conciliation officer has directed the appellant to approach the Labour Court for claiming arrears of wages. 6. In this back ground we have to examine what are the duties of the Conciliation officer if a complaint has been lodged by an aggrieved person. Section 12 of the Act deals with the duties of the Conciliation Officer, which reads thus: “DUTIES OF CONCILIATION OFFICER.- .(1) Where an industrial dispute exists or is apprehended, the conciliation officer may, or where the dispute relates to a public utility service and a notice under Section 22 has been given, shall, hold conciliation proceedings in the prescribed manner. Section 12 of the Act deals with the duties of the Conciliation Officer, which reads thus: “DUTIES OF CONCILIATION OFFICER.- .(1) Where an industrial dispute exists or is apprehended, the conciliation officer may, or where the dispute relates to a public utility service and a notice under Section 22 has been given, shall, hold conciliation proceedings in the prescribed manner. .(2) The conciliation officer shall, for the purpose of brining about a settlement of the dispute, without delay, investigate the dispute and all maters affecting the merits and the right settlement thereof and may do all such things as he thinks fit for the purpose of inducing the parties to come to a fair and amicable settlement of the dispute. .(3) If a settlement of the dispute or of any of the matters in dispute is arrived at in the course of the conciliation proceedings the conciliation officer shall send a report thereof to the appropriate Government or an officer authorized in this behalf by the appropriate Government together with a memorandum of the settlement signed by the parties to the dispute. .(4) If no such settlement is arrived at, the conciliation officer shall, as soon as practicable after the close of the investigation, send to the appropriate Government a full report setting forth the steps taken by him for ascertaining the facts and circumstances relating to the dispute and for brining about a settlement thereof, together with a full statement of such facts and circumstances, and the reasons on account of which, in his opinion, a settlement could not be arrived at. .(5) If, on a consideration of the report referred to in sub-Section (4), the appropriate Government is satisfied that there is a case for reference to a Board, Labour Court, Tribunal or National Tribunal, it may make such reference. Where the appropriate Government does not make such a reference it shall record and communicate to the parties concerned its reasons therefore. .(6) A report under this section shall be submitted within fourteen days of the commencement of the conciliation proceedings or within such shorter period as may be fixed by the appropriate Government. PROVIDED that, subject to the approval of the conciliation officer, the time for the submission of the report may be extended by such period as may be agreed upon in writing by all the parties to the dispute.” 7. PROVIDED that, subject to the approval of the conciliation officer, the time for the submission of the report may be extended by such period as may be agreed upon in writing by all the parties to the dispute.” 7. On perusal of this Section, it is clear to this Court that whenever the negotiation is failed it is for the Conciliation Officer to send a report to the Government under Section 12(4) of the Act and the Government on receipt of such report and on examination the same shall refer the matter to the Labour Court or Tribunal if the Government is satisfied that it is a case for reference. In the instant case, without following the same, the Conciliation Officer has directed the appellant to approach the Labour Court invoking Section 33(c)(2) of the Act. 8. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the Conciliation Officer as well as the learned Single Judge without examining the legal position in regard to the duty of the Conciliation Officer in terms of Section 12 of the Act, has rejected the writ petition. Therefore, the writ appeal has to be allowed and the order of the learned Single Judge is to be set aside. 9. In the result, the petition is allowed. The order passed by the Conciliation Officer dated 30-11-2004, Annexure-B, in directing the appellant to approach the Labour Court, is hereby quashed. Consequently, the order passed in W.P. No.2953/2005 dated 25-02-2005 is also quashed. A direction is issued to the Government to consider the report of the Conciliation Officer and after examining the same to take action in accordance with law under Sub-Section (5) of Section 12 of the Act, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.