RAVI R. TRIPATHI, J. ( 1 ) SPECIAL Civil Application No. 2783 of 2002 is filed by Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation ("the Corporation" for short) against the General Secretary of Municipal Mazdoor Association, seeking relief to quash and set aside the judgement and award dated 23rd April, 2001 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Reference (IT) No. 23 of 1999. Special Civil Application No. 9923 is filed by 39 workmen against the Corporation seeking relief that a direction be issued to the Corporation to implement the award dated 23rd April, 2001 passed by the Industrial Tribunal in Reference (IT) No. 23 of 1999 and Reference (IT) No. 331 of 1999. It is also prayed that as per the award of the Tribunal, the workmen are to receive only 40% of the arrears, but, the same is still not paid, be directed to be paid with interest. In addition thereto, it is also prayed that a writ be issued directing the Corporation to pay the full arrears to the workmen with interest. ( 2 ) AS in both these petitions, the judgement and award dated 23rd April, 2001 passed in Reference (IT) No. 23 of 1999 forms the subject matter, they were heard together. ( 3 ) THE controversy involved in both these petitions is that whether 77 workmen, as per Order No. K. H.-H. S. M. C. R/k/27333 IDR-A. J. 57/99 dated 4th February, 1999, and 54 workmen, as per Order No. K. H.-H. S. M. C. R/k/28000 IDR-A. J. 429/99 dated 31st August, 1999, discharging duties as Oilman, Pump Majoor, Jr. Pump Attendant, Wireman, Helper, Liftman, etc. in Light and Power Plant Tubewell Department, Dudheshwar Water Works Drainage Department and Hospital of the Corporation should be given pay scale of Rs. 260-Rs. 430 as per the award Part-III of Shri I. G. Thakore on the basis of the duties they performed and also they possessed educational qualification as stated in the advertisement and thereafter, increase in pay scale consequent upon the change being made from time to time w. e. f. 1st January, 1976 or not? 260-Rs. 430 as per the award Part-III of Shri I. G. Thakore on the basis of the duties they performed and also they possessed educational qualification as stated in the advertisement and thereafter, increase in pay scale consequent upon the change being made from time to time w. e. f. 1st January, 1976 or not? ( 4 ) THE background of the case is that in the 1976, when the award, Part-III, by the learned Arbitrator, Shri I. G. Thakore, was made, some 95 workmen, who were discharging their duties as Oilman and Pump Majoor, filed Recovery Application No. 3893 of 1977 under Section 33 (C) (2) of the I. D. Act claiming that they are doing the work of Wireman and Pump Attendant, which carry the pay scale of Rs. 260-Rs. 430, as per the award of Shri I. G. Thakore, but, the Corporation is not paying that pay scale to them. The said Recovery Application was allowed by the learned Judge of the Labour Court by an order dated 15th October, 1980. 4. 1 the Corporation, being aggrieved of the said order dated 15th October, 1980 passed in Recovery Application No. 3893 of 1977, filed Special Civil Application No. 3216 of 1981 before this Court wherein this Court, on 10th September, 1981, granted stay on condition that the Corporation shall pay 50% of the amount determined by the Labour Court to the workman concerned, which amount shall be refunded by the workmen in case the Corporation succeeds. At the time of final hearing, it was contended by the Corporation that the Labour Court had no jurisdiction under Section-33 (C) (2) of the I. D. Act to award the amount, against which the Municipal Majoor Union contended that the workmen were entitled under the arbitration award made by Shri I. G. Thakore. Thereafter, the parties passed a purshis requesting this Court to dispose of Special Civil Application No. 3216 of 1981 in terms of the purshis. This Court vide an order dated 12th July, 1996 disposed of the said petition by observing that, "as the order of the Labour Court does not mention that the benefits were computed on the basis of the award of Shri I. G. Thakore, the same is set aside". This Court vide an order dated 12th July, 1996 disposed of the said petition by observing that, "as the order of the Labour Court does not mention that the benefits were computed on the basis of the award of Shri I. G. Thakore, the same is set aside". The Court remitted back the matter to the Labour Court permitting the parties to raise all contentions available to them under the law, including the contention that the workmen were entitled to the benefits of the award of Shri I. G. Thakore. 4. 2 it so happened that during the pendency of the said Special Civil Application No. 3216 of 1981, another set of 181 workmen, who were discharging duties as Oilman and Pump Majoor, filed another Recovery Application No. 1636 of 1981 claiming that they were doing the work of pump operator and pump attendant, for which Shri I. G. Thakore had prescribed the pay scale of Rs. 260-430 in his award. After considering the evidence, the Labour Court, Ahmedabad, dismissed Recovery Application No. 1636 of 1991 by an order dated 25th July, 1990 observing that as per the award of Shri I. G. Thakore, pump attendant and pump operator on the one hand and oilman and pump majoor on the other hand formed two different categories; that it was not clearly established that pump majoor/oilman were doing the work of pump attendant; and, that the category of pump attendant was higher than the pump majoor and oilman. The learned Judge also observed that during the pendency of Recovery Application No. 1636 of 1981, the Reference (IT) No. 365 of 1978 of the oilman and pump majoor demanding the designation as pump operator came to be decided by the Tribunal of Shri G. S. Barot Saheb, by an award dated 19th March, 1983, negating the demand holding that the pump majoor/oilman and pump operator formed two different categories. The learned Judge also observed that in terms of the award of Shri G. S. Barot also, the workmen were not entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 260-Rs. 430 and that Part-III of the arbitration award was applicable only to the category of wireman and not to the category of pump majoor/oilman. Finally, the learned Judge concluded that the applicants-workmen were not able to prove that they are entitled to pay scale of Rs. 260-Rs. 430. 4. 260-Rs. 430 and that Part-III of the arbitration award was applicable only to the category of wireman and not to the category of pump majoor/oilman. Finally, the learned Judge concluded that the applicants-workmen were not able to prove that they are entitled to pay scale of Rs. 260-Rs. 430. 4. 3 being aggrieved of the order dated 25th July, 1990 passed in Recovery Application No. 1631 of 1981, the workmen approached this Court by way of Special Civil Application No. 8249 of 1990. Like the earlier petition, the Corporation contended before this Court that the claim of the workmen was not maintainable under Section-33 (C) (2) of the I. D. Act. As against that, the workmen contended that the claim is maintainable on the basis of Part-III of the arbitration award made by Shri I. G. Thakore. An agreement was arrived at between the parties and a purshis was filed praying that the order of the Labour Court made in Recovery Application No. 1631 of 1981 be confirmed and the matter be remanded to the Labour Court, where it will be open for the workmen to file additional statement putting forward their claim that they are entitled to get pay scale of Rs. 260-Rs. 430 on the basis of the award of Shri I. G. Thakore. This Court dismissed the said Special Civil Application No. 8249 of 1990 vide order dated 12th July, 1996 and while dismissing the petition, observed as under: ". . . . . . . . . However, on the agreement of the parties, it is hereby ordered that the petitioners shall be free to file fresh application before the Labour Court, Ahmedabad, for their entitlement to be placed in the grade of Rs. 260-430 on the basis of I. G. Thakore Award. It is made clear that the Corporation can also raise all the contentions disputing claim as also regarding maintainability of such claim U/s. 33c (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. In case if such proceedings are initiated by the petitioners. It is further ordered that the Labour Court, in case such an application is filed by the petitioners, shall decide the same in accordance with law after giving full opportunity to both the parties to lead their evidence and after giving them opportunity of making their submissions. . . . . . . "4. It is further ordered that the Labour Court, in case such an application is filed by the petitioners, shall decide the same in accordance with law after giving full opportunity to both the parties to lead their evidence and after giving them opportunity of making their submissions. . . . . . . "4. 4 thereafter, Recovery Application No. 3893 of 1977 (New No. 2618 of 1996) remitted back by this Court and one fresh Recovery Application No. 2413 of 1996 were heard together by the Labour Court, Ahmedabad and by an order dated 18th November, 1997, the Labour Court dismissed the same holding that the applicants-workmen had no preexisting right and that they have to raise an industrial dispute to get the benefits of the award of Shri I. G. Thakore. While dismissing both the Recovery Applications, the learned Judge directed the Corporation not to recover from the workmen 50% amount, which was ordered by this Court to be paid to them on 16th September, 1981 at the time of granting stay of execution/implementation of the order of the Labour Court in Recovery Application No. 3893 of 1977. 4. 5 this order dated 18th November, 1997 was again challenged by the workmen by way of Special Civil Application No. 9591 of 1998, which came to be disposed of by this Court vide an order dated 24th November, 1998 observing that the workmen can raise an industrial dispute and if such an industrial dispute is raised within four weeks by the workmen, the conciliation proceedings shall be concluded within 4 weeks. It was observed that in case if failure report is submitted, the Government shall take appropriate decision within 4 weeks and if the dispute is referred to the Labour Court/industrial Tribunal, the adjudicatory authority shall answer the same expeditiously. It is in light of the order dated 24th November, 1998 of this Court, the present Reference, being (IT) No. 23 of 1999, came into being and the judgement and award passed therein is the subject matter of challenge in both these petitions. ( 5 ) IN the background of the facts narrated above, it is clear that the workmen made several endeavours to get the pay scale of Rs. 260-Rs. 430. ( 5 ) IN the background of the facts narrated above, it is clear that the workmen made several endeavours to get the pay scale of Rs. 260-Rs. 430. It is also apparent on the record of the case that the workmen were given right to claim their entitlement under Part-III of the arbitration award of Shri I. G. Thakore and accordingly, the workmen made their claim before the Labour Court under Section-33 (C) (2) of the I. D. Act, but, the same came to be rejected by order dated 24th November, 1998 passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 9591 of 1998, and the parties were once again sent to the Tribunal. ( 6 ) THE parties, while before the Industrial Tribunal, did not lead any evidence and relied upon the evidence led in the previous litigation and, therefore, the Industrial Tribunal was pleased to examine the oral evidence led in the Recovery Applications and consider the arbitration award made by Shri I. G. Thakore. The Industrial Tribunal has considered the evidence recorded in Recovery Application No. 3893 of 1977 (New No. 2618 of 1996) and Recovery Application No. 1636 of 1981 and the documentary evidence produced by the Corporation in the form of written instructions or circulars. It is, after considering all the relevant material and the decisions of various Courts cited before the Industrial Tribunal, that the Tribunal has passed the order, which reads as under :"both these Reference Cases are partly allowed. Out of the concerned workmen, those who possess I. T. I. Certificate, N. C. T. V. T. Certificate, Technical Examination Board Certificate, Licensing Boards Certificate in either of the trades of wireman/electrician/lineman shall be given the pay scale of Rs. 260-430 w. e. f. the date of the I. G. Thakore Sahebs award was made applicable to other employees of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. Their pay should be fixed in the relevant pay scale applicable to them from time to time and amount of arrears shall be calculated. The workmen concerned shall, however, receive only 40% of the arrears and 60% shall have to be waived by them. It is, however, made clear that those who received any amount in terms of the order passed by the Hon. High Court dated 16. 09. The workmen concerned shall, however, receive only 40% of the arrears and 60% shall have to be waived by them. It is, however, made clear that those who received any amount in terms of the order passed by the Hon. High Court dated 16. 09. 81 in Special Civil Application No. 3216/81 shall be adjusted against the amount which they may receive in terms of the present award. The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation shall pay Rs. 500/- by way of costs to the Union. " ( 7 ) MR. CHHAYA, learned Advocate for the Corporation, made available a copy of the award passed by Shri I. G. Thakore. Part-III of the award reads as under :"light AND POWER PLANT: There are a large number of wiremen and electrician in the Light and Power Plant of the Corporation. There are also number of such persons, in the other Departments of the Corporation including Dairy, A. M. T. S. , V. S. Hospital, etc. I have dealt with them at some length beginning with page 213 of my Award Part-I and given them varying scales depending upon their designation and their existing salaries. The electrician has been particularly dealt with a page 223 and the wiremen at page 224. In dealing with them, I have tried to follow the recommendations of the Desai Commission to the extent possible. In view of the variety of scales given by Desai at different places, I had to select some and drop the others. It has been pressed upon me that I have been unfair to wiremen at least who possess a Second Class Wiremans certificate; that I have been also unfair to the Electricians inasmuch as I have put some wiremen getting a little higher wages at par with the Electricians. It has been submitted that an Electrician is required to pass an Electrician-1 Supervisors Examination and a person who has passed the wiremens examination can appear for Electrical Supervisors Examination only after five years. There appears to be some substance in what is stated. It has been submitted that an Electrician is required to pass an Electrician-1 Supervisors Examination and a person who has passed the wiremens examination can appear for Electrical Supervisors Examination only after five years. There appears to be some substance in what is stated. Without modifying what I have awarded in Part-I of the Award, I would further direct as follows :a person in the Light and Power Plant or in any other department who is required, according to the eligibility qualifications to possess the Second Class Wiremans Certificate and does possess such a certificate shall in no event be placed in the grade lower than Rs. 260-430. A person in the Light and the Power Plant or in any other department who is required as per the eligibility qualifications to possess an Electrical Supervisors Examination Certificate and possesses such a certificate shall in no event be placed in a grade lower than Rs. 330-560. This direction shall equally apply to all departments of the Corporation including Dairy, A. M. T. S. , V. S. Hospital, School Board, M. J. Library, etc. I further direct that this direction shall not adversely affect any other direction given by me. "the question, therefore, is about interpreting Part-III of the award of Shri I. G. Thakore. The learned Member of the Industrial Tribunal was right in observing in paragraph 31 that, Part-III of the award starts with the word, "a person" and also includes phrase, "in any other department". In Part-III of the award, the term, "wireman/electrician", is not used and it is not used with a purpose because in the latter part, the phrase, "in any other department", is used, which, in the considered opinion of this Court, is with a view not to restrict its applicability to a particular department. The underlying principle of Part-III of the award is that, "there should be no heart burning amongst the employees". The person, who possesses the qualification which is required for a particular post, must get the grade of that post. The underlying principle of Part-III of the award is that, "there should be no heart burning amongst the employees". The person, who possesses the qualification which is required for a particular post, must get the grade of that post. That is why, the learned Arbitrator was pleased to say that "there appears to be some substance in what is stated", and that is why, the learned Arbitrator has said that "without modifying what I have awarded in Part-I of the award, I would further direct as follows", and lastly it is said that "i further direct that this direction shall not adversely affect any other direction given by me". ( 8 ) IF Part-III of the award of Shri I. G. Thakore is interpreted, in light of the aforesaid observations, then, it can be interpreted only in the manner as set out herein under : if a workman holding a particular post, which requires a particular qualification, possesses such qualification, he is to be given the grade of that post. The phrase used by the learned Arbitrator is "shall in no event" be placed in the grade lower than Rs. 260-430. " The general principle, which can be culled out from Part-III of the award, is that, "if a person holds a post and possesses the requisite qualification for that post, he is entitled to get the pay scale of that post". ( 9 ) THE learned Member of the Industrial Tribunal is also right when he says that, the learned Arbitrator was mindful of using the term, "a person", and was also mindful of using the phrase, "in any other department". Therefore, the award can be interpreted only in the manner aforesaid and the workmen are to be given the benefits of the award of Shri I. G. Thakore. It is further clarified that the benefits shall be given from the date the workmen acquired that qualification. This is clarified only with a view to avoid the event of raising doubts and creation of any confusion. A person, who acquired the qualification at a latter stage and who did not possess the qualification at the time of his initial entry, should also not be deprived of this benefit. Let no further confusion prevail on this point. ( 10 ) THE Corporation is hereby directed to work out the cases of individual workman, applying the aforesaid clarification. A person, who acquired the qualification at a latter stage and who did not possess the qualification at the time of his initial entry, should also not be deprived of this benefit. Let no further confusion prevail on this point. ( 10 ) THE Corporation is hereby directed to work out the cases of individual workman, applying the aforesaid clarification. The exercise of working out the benefits should be completed within four months from the date of receipt of this order. The petitions are, accordingly, disposed of only on the point of interpretation of Part-III of the award of Shri I. G. Thakore. The other contentions of the workmen on the point of equal pay for equal work are not touched. The same are kept open and it is left to them to take appropriate remedy available to them in accordance with law. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent only. No order as to costs. .