JUDGMENT M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.K. Ughal, teamed counsel for the respondents. 2. In this writ application, the petitioner, namely, the Management of Amlabad Colliery of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited challenged the Award, dated 22.1.1993 passed by Central Industrial Tribunal, Dhanbad in Reference Case No. 105 of 1991 answering the reference in favour of the workmen. 3. It appears that Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of power conferred on them under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred the following dispute to the Tribunal for adjudication : "Whether the demand of the Union for reinstatement of Md. Zubair Alam as Auto Electrician with back wages w.e.f. 11.12.1989 on account of illegal stoppage from work by the Management of Amlabad Colliery of M/s. BCCL is justified ? If so, to what relief the workman is entitled ?" 4. The case of the workman Md. Zubair is that he was employed as Auto Electrician by the Management of Amlabad Colliery and his services were utilised from 5.1.1987 to 11.12.1989, when he was abruptly stopped from work without any notification and justifiable cause. It was contended that during the period of his service at Amlabad Colliery, he was paid his wages on voucher. The workman, therefore, claimed reinstatement in the service and payment of wages. 5. The case of the Management is that the workman was never employed as Auto Electrician or in any capacity. It is stated that the relationship of Employer- Employee between the workman and the Management ever existed and therefore, stoppage of work illegally did not arise. The Managements further case is that once M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works, Jamadoba, Dhanbad deals with repair of Dynamo, Armature, Battery, etc. and the Management Amlabad Project used to utilise the services of M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works for repairing its electrical equipment on contract basis. It is contended that the concerned workman was working on behalf of M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works and was drawing and receiving bills/payment on their behalf. 6. Both, the Management and the concerned workman adduced their evidences both oral and documentary before the Tribunal in the said Reference case. The Tribunal after considering the entire facts of the case and the evidences adduced by the parties answered the Award in favour of the concerned workman. 6. Both, the Management and the concerned workman adduced their evidences both oral and documentary before the Tribunal in the said Reference case. The Tribunal after considering the entire facts of the case and the evidences adduced by the parties answered the Award in favour of the concerned workman. Accordingly, the Tribunal directed the Management to reinstate the concerned workman as Auto Electrical with back-wages at the rate of Rs. 500/-per month and further to fix minimum wages as per the NCWA. 7. Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned counsel for the Management assailed the impugned award and the finding recorded by the Tribunal as being perverse in law. Learned counsel submitted that the Tribunal has not appreciated the evidence adduced by the Management in its right perspective and the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal is based on no evidence. Learned counsel submitted that the vouchers and other documentary evidence does not prove that the petitioner was paid salary by the Management and work was taken from him as a casual worker or part- time worker. 8. From perusal of the Award, it appears that the Tribunal has discussed meticulously all the evidences adduced by the parties and came to a finding that the concerned workman used to work as an Auto Electrician and receiving his salary from the Management. The Tribunal discussed both the documentary evidence and the oral evidence. Exhibits W-1 and W-2 are the photocopies of the vouchers prepared in the name of Md. Halim for its payment to the concerned workman Md. Zubair Alam. In the voucher it is mentioned that the amount is paid as an advance for payment of salary of Md. Zubair Alam. The case of the Management in the written statement is that these vouchers were prepared by mistake. Similarly, Ext. W-3 series are the photocopies of the Colliery Requisition slip issued in the name of Md. Zubair. Although, the case of the Management is that these requisition-slips were issued to ensure the use of right material by the M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works. But, from perusal of these requisition no where the name of M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works is mentioned, rather these requisitions were issued in the name of the concerned workman. Zubair. Although, the case of the Management is that these requisition-slips were issued to ensure the use of right material by the M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works. But, from perusal of these requisition no where the name of M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works is mentioned, rather these requisitions were issued in the name of the concerned workman. The Tribunal also took notice of the fact that various other materials, namely, Acid, S.F. wire and distilled water were issued for the repairing and cleaning work in the name of the concerned workman and for his safety he was also provided the Mining Shoe. The Tribunal further took notice of the admitted fact that the concerned workman used to do repairing work at the Colliery itself. It has also come in evidence that the concerned workman made representation for enhancement of salary and the representation was forwarded to the concerned officers for discussion. One of the important witness Md. Halim, who was in employment of the Management and retired in 1988 from Amlabad Colliery as Mechanical Foreman deposed that he saw the concerned workman working in the colliery from 1987 till his retirement Taking into consideration, all the facts and the documents produced by the workman in support thereof the Tribunal recorded a finding of fact that the concerned workman was working in the Colliery since 1987 as Auto Electrician and the Management used to pay salary to him. No evidence has been brought on record by the Management to show that the con- cerned workman was the employee of M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works nor any evidence was brought by the Management to show that the amount of salary or repairing charge was being paid to the workman on behalf of M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works. There is also nothing on the record to show that M/s. Shama Auto Electric Works ever requested the Management to make payment of the amount by way of salary or otherwise to the concerned workman on their behalf. In absence of any cogent evidence from the said of the Management, I do not find any reason to hold that the finding recorded by the Tribunal is perverse in law or based on no evidence. 9. In absence of any cogent evidence from the said of the Management, I do not find any reason to hold that the finding recorded by the Tribunal is perverse in law or based on no evidence. 9. It is well-settled that if the Award of Labour Court or Tribunal is based on finding of fact, the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot substitute its own finding on reappreciation of the evidence, unless the finding is erroneous and perverse in law. In the case of "Ajaib Singh v. The Sirhind Co-operative Marketing-cum-Processing Service Society Ltd. and Anr.," AIR 1999 SC 1351 , their Lordship observed that: "The High Court was also not justified in holding that the Courts were bound to render an even handed justice by keeping balance between the two different parties. Such an approach totally ignores the aims and object and the social object sought to be achieved by the Act. Even after noticing that "it is true that a fight between the workman and the management is not a just between equals," the Court was not justified to make them equals while returning the findings, which if allowed to prevail, would result in frustration of the purpose of the enactment. The workman appears to be justified in complaining that in the absence of any plea on behalf of the management and any evidence, regarding delay, he could not be deprived of the benefits under the Act merely on technicalities of law. The High Court appears to have substituted its opinion for the opinion of the Labour Court which was not permissible in proceedings under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution." 10. As noticed above, the Tribunal after considering the lads and the entire evidence adduced by the parties came to a finding that the concerned workman was working in Amlabad Colliery regularly and was getting his monthly salary and other benefits. I do not find any strong evidence or circumstances to reverse the finding of the Tribunal. 11. For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned Award of the Labour Court needs to interference. This writ application is dismissed. 12. Application dismissed.