Hon'ble RASTOGI, J.—The instant intra court appeal has been preferred against order of the learned Single Judge dated 18/09/2007. 2. The facts, which are relevant for our consideration emerges from the writ petition preferred by the Corporation are that respondent-workman now deceased was working as Conductor and while in service, for his alleged misconduct that he was carrying passengers without ticket, a disciplinary enquiry was conducted and after the charge stand finally proved, he was removed from service vide order dated 20/02/1991 and it appears that an industrial dispute was pending before the Industrial Tribunal of the Union of which, the respondent-workman was also a member. 3. Taking note thereof, the Corporation filed application in the Industrial Tribunal u/S.33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, the “Act 1947”) seeking permission/approval of its action for dismissal of services of the respondent-workman. Certain pre-condition was to be complied with while the application seeking approval of action of the management at the stage of application u/S.33(2)(b) of the Act 1947 being filed. 4. Indisputably, the short payment was tendered/ offered by the Corporation to the respondent-workman at the stage when the application u/S.33(2)(b) of the Act 1947 was filed and that was objected by the respondent-workman. After examination, the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that there was non-compliance of pre-condition of Sec.33(2)(b) of the Act 1947 and accordingly, rejected their application filed by the Corporation and declined to grant permission seeking approval of dismissal of services of the respondent-workman, vide order dated 14/11/2000 and that was the subject-matter of challenge in the writ petition filed before the learned Single Judge. 5. While examining the validity of the order of the Tribunal dated 14/11/2000, a finding has been recorded by the learned Single Judge regarding non-compliance of the mandatory provision, which is the pre-condition to be complied with by the employer-Corporation at the stage seeking permission of their action, which indisputably was not complied with and short payment in lieu of one month's notice pay was offered to the deceased respondent-workman at the time of his termination. 6. 6. The learned Single Judge taking note of the judicial precedence of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the issue and arriving at the conclusion that no error was committed by the Tribunal after finding of fact being recorded regarding short payment in lieu of one month's notice pay, which was offered/tendered to the workman and observed that the order of the Tribunal dated 14/11/2000 does not call for any interference and we too find that there is no infirmity in the order of the Tribunal impugned in the writ petition filed before the learned Single Judge. 7. We too do not find any apparent error in the order of the learned Single Judge, which require any interference by this Court in this intra court appeal. 8. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed being devoid of any merit.