ORDER Aggrieved by order dated 22.07.2014 in Reference No. 11 of 1987/04 of 2003, the present writ petition has been filed. 2. Briefly stated, the facts narrated in the writ petition are summarised thus ; (i) The petitioner is a public sector undertaking of the Government of India. Initially, it was created as 100% subsidiary of Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation (MMTC) in the year, 1973. By virtue of an order passed by BIFR in the year, 1996 it finally merged with MMTC Ltd. It is stated that certain dispute arose which led to reference by the then Government of Bihar on 15.09.1987 and an award was passed on 28.11.1994. The said award was challenged in C.W.J.C. No. 3892 of 1995 (R) and this Court set-aside the said award with a direction to the Industrial Tribunal to decide the reference afresh. The Letters Patent Appeal being L.P.A. No. 870 of 2003 was filed challenging order dated 30.09.2003, in which the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3892 of 1995 (R) was affirmed however, with a liberty to raise the plea of competence of the Government to make reference. A Special Leave Petition being S.L.P. (C) No. 16751 of 2012 was filed raising a plea that the paying capacity of the employer is also a relevant factor which should have been considered by the industrial tribunal. The Special Leave Petition was disposed of vide order dated 24.01.2014 with a direction to the industrial tribunal to dispose of reference, expeditiously. Thereafter, on 24.03.2014 an application seeking leave to file additional written statement was filed in Reference Case No. 11 of 1987. The Industrial Tribunal refused to grant leave for filing additional written statement. Aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. 3. Mr. Raj Nandan Sahay, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that paying capacity of the employer is a necessary factor which must be considered by the tribunal, the petitioner filed application dated 24.03.2014. It is submitted that the said application was filed by the petitioner for bringing subsequent events on record. After the award was made in the year, 1994, the petitioner company has merged with MMTC Ltd. and thus, the reference/award has become infructuous in as much as, it is now against a nonexistent company. 4. As against the above, Mr. It is submitted that the said application was filed by the petitioner for bringing subsequent events on record. After the award was made in the year, 1994, the petitioner company has merged with MMTC Ltd. and thus, the reference/award has become infructuous in as much as, it is now against a nonexistent company. 4. As against the above, Mr. Mahesh Tewari, the learned counsel for the respondent refers to order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3892 of 1995 (R) and submits that the remand vide order dated 30.09.2003 was a limited remand and the parties were not permitted to lead further evidence. Order dated 30.09.2003 of the Writ Court has specifically restricted power of the tribunal in as much as, the tribunal was directed to decide the reference on the basis of materials available on record. It is further submitted that it is not denied that the petitioner company was 100% subsidiary unit of MMTC and thus, liability of the petitioner company must be borne by its principle unit. 5. The issue involved in the present writ petition revolves around the question whether in view of order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3892 of 1995 (R), the parties are entitled to lead further evidence or not. Order dated 30.09.2003 in C.W.J.C. No. 3892 of 1995 (R) directs the tribunal as under : 8. “Without going into the merit of the case of either party, the impugned award is hereby set aside solely on the ground that the Industrial Tribunal has not answered the reference made to it and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh decision on the reference made to it, after hearing both the parties and on the basis of the materials already on record.” 6. The order passed by the Writ Court was affirmed by the Division Bench. The award stood quashed after Civil Appeal No. 904 of 2014 was disposed of vide order dated 24.01.2014, without modifying the order passed by the Writ Court. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner tenders a copy of application dated 24.03.2014, the same is taken on record. In the said application, the petitioner has averred as under : 6. “That a perusal of the reference order would show that dispute which was referred for adjudication was between the management of Mica Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (shortly referred as MITCO) and its workmen. In the said application, the petitioner has averred as under : 6. “That a perusal of the reference order would show that dispute which was referred for adjudication was between the management of Mica Trading Corporation of India Ltd. (shortly referred as MITCO) and its workmen. The MITCO was a company incorporated under the Companies Act. It was an undertaking of the Central Government. Since filing of the written statement by the management, lot of development have been taken place as much as MITCO became a sick company and was referred to BIFR. BIFR ordered for merger of MITCO with MMTC Ltd. and on merger, the same was to become and became Mica Division of MMTC Ltd. As a result of the proceedings before BIFR referred to above, MITCO has ceased to exist. The claimant are pursuing the reference against MITCO, a nonexistent entity and thus the proceedings against MITCO are not maintainable. 7. That after merger MITCO became Mica Division of MMTC Ltd. but the said division is not doing any business. No business is being carried in Mica by the said Mica Division since October, 1990.” 7. The industrial tribunal while rejecting the application dated 24.03.2014 observed that after more than two decades, permitting the petitioner to file additional written statement would amount to reopening of the entire case. The tribunal has also taken note of the direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 8. From the materials brought on record, I find that the petitioner company which was a 100% subsidiary unit of Minerals and Metals Trading Corporation has merged into MMTC Ltd. The merger has taken place in pursuance of order passed by BIFR and thus, it is apparent that all the assets and liability of the then company has been owned by the MMTC Ltd. As noticed above, order dated 30.09.2003 in C.W.J.C. No. 3892 of 1995 (R) directs the industrial tribunal to decide the matter on the basis of materials available on record and thus, the power of the industrial tribunal to receive additional evidence has been curtailed by the order passed by the Writ Court. Orders passed in L.P.A. No. 870 of 2003 and Civil Appeal No. 904 of 2014 also do not permit the parties to lead additional evidence. 9. Considering the above facts, I find no infirmity in the impugned order dated 22.07.2014 and accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.