alleged enquiry was conducted at the back of the petitioners and they were never joined therein and hence, there was gross violation of principles of natural justice by the Management. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the Labour Court has completely ignored these aspects of the matter and as such, the award is liable to be set aside. There is no substance in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The requirement of natural justice must depend upon the circumstances of the case, nature of enquiry, the rules under which the Tribunal is acting, the subject matter that is being dealt with and so forth. The strict rule of evidence are not applicable in departmental enquiry and the standard of proof being different, it is sufficient to establish a charge by evidence, albeit not by any conjecture or surmises, acting upon which reasonably and objectively, a reasonable man could uphold the charge. As many as fifteen charges were levelled against the petitioners, including incitement to other workmen to stay in strike; willful and deliberate delay in production and also instigation to other workers to slow down the production; insubordination; provoking the other workmen to stage a Dharma; criminal intimidation to other workmen and agents of Management; causing of obstacle in movement of the Directors and other office bearers; putting dirt on the Incharge Corresponding Section; man-handling with the Directors etc. etc. The impugned order of termination dated 31.10.1980 is selfexplanatory and carries each and every detail of the charges against the petitioners, which were found proved. The perusal of the impugned order reveals that the petitioners were duly served with the show cause notice at the gate of the mill, followed by the charge-sheet containing the charges on which the Management proposed to conduct an enquiry. It has also
