JUDGMENT : DEVASHIS BARUAH, J. Heard Mr. S.R.A. Naser, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Roy, the learned CGC appears on behalf of the respondent No. 1; Ms. U. Das, the learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appears on behalf of the respondent No. 2 and Mr. J. Roy, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. B.P. Sarmah, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No. 3. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Award dated 06.04.2013 passed in Reference Case No. 17/1991 as well as the order dated 30.09.2014 passed in Misc. Case No. 01/2014 by the learned Industrial Tribunal, Guwahati. 3. This Court duly takes note of that on 06.12.1991, a Notification was issued by the appropriate Government whereby a reference was made to the Presiding Officer of the Industrial Tribunal, Guwahati. The Terms of Reference, as mentioned in the Schedule to the said Notification dated 06.12.1991, are reproduced hereinbelow: -Schedule- 1. (a) Whether the action of Bokajan Cement Crop. Employees Union in raising the demands vide their letter No. BKJ-9/BCCEU/1/89-90/18 dt. 2st/24 th July, 1989 (as per annexure) before the General Manager, Bokajan Cement Factory, Bokajan is justified? (b) If so what relief are the workman concerned entitled to? 2. (a) Whether the strikes resorted to by the workman of the aforesaid Cement Factory on 23.04.91 to 24.04.91 are legal and justified? (b) If so, what relief are the said workman entitled to?” 4. The records reveal that pursuant to the issuance of the said Notification, a reference proceeding was registered being Reference Case No. 17/1991 before the learned Industrial Tribunal, Guwahati. In the said proceedings, both sides initially participated. However, after 23 years, the said reference proceeding was closed vide the order dated 06.04.2013 on the ground that neither of the parties were interested in the matter. No steps were taken in spite of directions passed by the learned Industrial Tribunal and it was under such circumstances, the learned Industrial Tribunal, Guwahati came to an opinion, no industrial dispute existed between the parties and accordingly passed a no-dispute award. 5. The records further reveal that the petitioner thereupon filed an application before the learned Industrial Tribunal, Guwahati being Misc. Case No. 01/2014 seeking recall of the order dated 06.04.2013. 5. The records further reveal that the petitioner thereupon filed an application before the learned Industrial Tribunal, Guwahati being Misc. Case No. 01/2014 seeking recall of the order dated 06.04.2013. The learned Industrial Tribunal, Guwahati vide a detailed order dated 30.09.2014 observed that there was no sufficient cause for recalling the order dated 06.04.2013 and accordingly dismissed the said application. 6. Two years thereafter, on 15.11.2016, the present writ petition was filed. The records further reveal that this Court had issued notice. The records also show that the writ petition was twice dismissed for non-prosecution. 7. In the backdrop of the above, the most pertinent question which arises in the present proceedings is as to whether any industrial dispute is in existence or whether the said dispute has become stale with the passage of time. 8. It is pertinent to observe that the Terms of Reference mentioned in the Schedule to the Notification dated 06.12.1991 was primarily in respect to two aspects. 9. The first aspect related to whether the action of the Bokajan Cement Corporation Employees Union in raising demands vide the letter dated 21/24.07.1989 before the General Manager, Bokajan Cement Factory, Bokajan was justified. This Court has perused the Charter of Demands submitted in the year 1989. These demands were raised almost 37 years ago and, as on date, no longer have relevance, taking into account the passage of time. Under such circumstances, the Terms of Reference pertaining to the demands raised vide the letter dated 21/24.07.1989 had become a stale dispute. 10. The second aspect of the Terms of Reference pertained to the strike resorted to by the workmen of the cement factory from 23.04.1991 to 24.04.1991 and whether the same was legal and justified. This aspect has also become stale over the years, considering that approximately 35 years have passed by. Under such circumstances, it is the opinion of this Court that no meaningful result would arise even if the impugned Award dated 06.04.2013 or the order dated 30.09.2014 were to be interfered with. 11. Accordingly, this Court does not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same accordingly stands dismissed. 12. Before parting with the records, it is observed that the dismissal of the instant writ petition is on account of the industrial dispute having become stale. 11. Accordingly, this Court does not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same accordingly stands dismissed. 12. Before parting with the records, it is observed that the dismissal of the instant writ petition is on account of the industrial dispute having become stale. The reasons for dismissal of the instant writ petition shall not preclude the petitioner Union from raising such demands as permissible under law and the observations made in the present judgment, as well as by the learned Industrial Tribunal, Guwahati while passing the no-dispute award, shall not affect the petitioner Union in raising such disputes, if otherwise permissible under law.