JUDGMENT Ajay Mohan Goel, J —By way of present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- "i) In view of the peculiar protracted litigation and the petitioner being under severe duress, the above noted matter is the one where an early possible adjudication thereof is prayed for. ii) Record of the Industrial Tribunal-Labour Court may kindly be summoned for the kind perusal as how learned Labour Court erred to conclude and pass the impugned award on the basis of selective record full of discrepancies and contradictions. iii) That a writ in the nature of certiorari may kindly be issued to the respondents concerned and impugned award dated 4.8.2009 may kindly be quashed/set aside and respondent department may kindly be directed to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential service benefits including seniority benefit. iv) That the respondent department may be directed to pay back wage along with wage due to him on account of earned wages and wages for over time and weekly rests legally admissible to the petitioner along with rate of interest who has been daily rated Mazdoor being lowest paid workman and has been suffering financial hardship on account of loss of job due to careless and in compassionate conduct in respect of petitioner by not producing the relevant record of attendance of petitioner maintained by his immediate superior officer, i.e. Telephone Mechanic/Lineman and concealing facts of continuous working of petitioner but also producing some selective record which is full of discrepancies and contradiction and not producing best evidence of Muster Rolls of petitioner which was admittedly with respondent department. v) Any compensation as this Hon''ble Court may kindly consider just for lowest paid workman who suffered mental agony for the loss of his livelihood and for forced litigation due to careless and in compassionate attitude of the concerned officers of respondent department." 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that reference which stood made by the appropriate Government to the learned Labour Court has been wrongly answered against the workman and the findings returned by learned Labour Court to the effect that the termination of the workman was not in violation of the Industrial Disputes Act are perverse. In order to substantiate his contention, Mr. In order to substantiate his contention, Mr. Sharma has submitted that after the services of the petitioner were terminated, respondents engaged one Mahesh Kumar and this act of the respondents of engaging a fresh hand i.e., Mahesh Kumar without first exhausting the provisions of 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act i.e., without first giving an opportunity to the petitioner by way of an offer as to whether he intended to rejoin his duties or not was against the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case. 4. Having perused the reference made to the learned Labour Court, as also the pleadings so filed by the respective parties, in my considered view, no fault can be found with the award so passed by the learned Labour Court. This I say so for the reason that the reference which was so made by the appropriate Government to the learned Labour Court was as to whether the action of the management in terminating the services of Ravinder Kumar was legal and justified or not. The reference was not as to whether the engagement of Mahesh Kumar was in violation of the provisions of 25H of the Industrial Disputes Act. Accordingly, thus as the learned Tribunal could not have had returned findings by transgressing the reference so made to it, I do not find any merit in the contentions so made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that as probably an incorrect reference was made by the appropriate Government to the learned Labour Court without actually appreciating the issue raised by the workman, it will be in the interest of justice in case the workman is permitted to raise the dispute afresh in accordance with law. He further submits that as the workman was diligently pursuing his cause in the Court of law, therefore, delay and laches/limitation should not come in his way for pursuing his cause afresh. Liberty granted, as prayed for. Accordingly this petition is disposed of without interfering with the award so passed by learned Labour Court, with liberty to the petitioner, as prayed for, in the interest of justice. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any also stand disposed of.