54. Inasmuch as this Court, adjudicating the present writ petition, is effectively stepping into the shoes of the Industrial Tribunal, it is necessary, now, to examine whether the order, dated 1st June, 2012, terminating the services of the petitioner, was justified, or not. In doing so, it has to be borne in mind that, even if an order of termination of service, or discharge, or dismissal, of a workman, is found to be violative of the principles of natural justice, the Labour Court, or Industrial Tribunal would not be justified, solely on that ground, in reinstating the workman in service, or in declaring the dismissal, or discharge, of the workman, from service, to be unjustified. The exercise of examination, of whether an order of discharge, or dismissal, from service, of a workman, is, or is not, justified, encompasses two stages, i.e., (i) assessment of whether the order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, or is vitiated for any other procedural reason, and (ii) even if the answer to (i) were to be in the affirmative, examination of whether, independently, the factum of commission of misconduct, by the workman concerned is, or is not, established by the management before the Labour Court, or Industrial Tribunal. The Industrial Tribunal has, in the present case, therefore, rightly held that the management is, therefore, entitled, even in a case where it discharges,
