Judgment :- J. Kanakaraj, J. 1. This is an application to modify the order, dated 7th July, 1995, in WMP No. 4121 of 1995 and four further direction that the payment to the second respondent under S.17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act shall cease to be effective with effect from 31st December, 1997, on which date the second respondent was superannuated. The writ petition has been filed challenging the award of the first respondent-Labour Court directing reinstatement of the second respondents with back wages. In WMP No. 31079 of 1993, Bakthavatsalam, J. passed an order on 17th December, 1993 directing payment of last drawn wages at the rate of Rs. 1817 per month from the date of the writ petition till its disposal. So far as back wages are concerned, the interim stay was made absolute on the petitioner-management paying a sum of Rs. 40, 000 to the workman and depositing the balance in the Labour Court. Such balance amount was directed to be invested in a nationalised bank for a period of three years. Subsequently, there were certain modifications relating to the quantum of last drawn wages with which we are not concerned. In the affidavit in support of the present application, it is stated that the second respondent had reached the age of superannuation on 31 December 1997 and, therefore, there could not be any payment under S. 17-B after the said date. This application was filed on 15 December, 1997 itself. This application is opposed by the second respondent on the ground that the question of last drawn wages under S. 17-B has nothing to do with the retirement of the workman. 2. Sri Meenakshisundaram for the petitioner-management say that the payment of last drawn wages is relatable to the period of office of the workman. According to him, the word "wages" is relatable to employment and once the employment comes to an end on superannuation, there cannot be any payment under S.17-B of the Act. Per contra, Sri Prasad argues that the payment under S. 17-B is to enable the workman to survive a litigation and, therefore, pending disposal of the writ petition, the payment cannot be stopped at any time even if the workman had reached the age of superannuation. For this purpose, reliance is placed on 1984 SC 238 (sic), 1986 SC 645 and 1983 SC 110. For this purpose, reliance is placed on 1984 SC 238 (sic), 1986 SC 645 and 1983 SC 110. All these decisions are cited only for the proposition that the purpose of enacting S. 17-B is only to help the worker to survive a litigation. Therefore, it is argued that even though the workman/second respondent has reached the age of superannuation, the payment under S. 17-B cannot be stopped because he has still to fight the pending litigation namely W.P. No. 12743 of 1993. Reference is made by both the counsel to a recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Dena Bank v. Kiritikumar Patel, 1998 I CLR 191. This decision was warranted because of the difference of opinion between various High Courts on the interpretation of the word "full wages last drawn". The Apex Court has now interpreted those words as meaning the wages last drawn on the date of termination. However, in doing so, the Apex Court has referred to payment under S. 17-B as being in the nature of subsistence allowance. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the sentence that the relief under S. 17-B is on account of delay in implementation of the award as a result of the pendency of the writ petition. 3. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions. I am clearly of the opinion that the payment under S. 17-B can continue only so long as the workmen is in employment. The moment the workman reached the age of superannuation, his right to get wages is lost. The argument of Sri Prasad that the management cannot have the benefit of stay in the writ petition and at the same time, refuse to pay last drawn wages under S. 17-B is no doubt attractive. But, in my opinion, that relates only to the question of the prima facie merits in writ petition. In other words, once the workman reaches the age of superannuation, he loses his right to get last drawn wages under S. 17-B and his right is only to get the back wages as per the award which is impugned in the writ petition. Therefore, when stay is granted in respect of the award relating to the back wages, one has to consider whether such a stay is warranted on the merits of that case. Therefore, when stay is granted in respect of the award relating to the back wages, one has to consider whether such a stay is warranted on the merits of that case. Normally, in a money decree, Courts have been directing payment of 50 per cent of the amount decreed. In cases under the industrial dispute, Courts have been directing payment of part of the back wages and directing deposit of the balance in any nationalised bank. In this case, I have already noticed the fact that the sum of Rs. 40, 000 has already been paid to the workman by way of back wages. The balance which is said to be Rs. 85, 839 has been deposited in a nationalised bank, but the interest therefrom is not being paid to the workman. Therefore, all that the workman can now agitate is for some more payment out of the back wages in view of the stoppage of the last drawn wages under S. 17-B 4. In this view of the matter, while holding that the last drawn wages shall cease with effect from 31 December, 1997, I direct the first respondent-Labour Court to withdrawn from the deposit made with the nationalised bank a sum of Rs. 35, 839 along with the whole of the accrued interest and direct payment of the same to the second respondent workman. The balance of Rs. 50, 000 shall continue to remain in deposit till the disposal of the writ petition. The interest from the said deposit of Rs. 50, 000 shall be paid over to the workman once in three months directly by the bank in question. It is made clear that no final determination of back wages is made in these proceedings and that is a question which one be agitated by the workman in subsequent proceedings if necessary. The modification of the order is ordered in the above terms.