JUDGMENT Hon’ble S.N. Srivastava, J.—Challenge in this petition and the connected petitions is centred on award dated 6.4.2000 rendered in Adjudication case No. 16 of 1998 by Labour Court-IV U.P. Kanpur which was published on 29.6.2000. By this award, it would appear, the Labour Court aforesaid gave verdict on the reference made by the State Government directing to treat the workman as Junior Staff Officer F-Grade with effect from 31.7.91 alongwith wages in the scale of Rs. 1900-3225 attended with designation of that grade and also the other emoluments admissible to that grade. 2. Facts giving rise to the dispute involved in the writ petition No. 44294 of 2000 which is treated to be the pivotal petition is that the petitioner entered the service as clerk and was deployed in wages section and subsequently, he was transferred to work as clerk at the main gate on 31.7.1991. One K.P. Chaurasia who was working as Junior Staff F Grade retired from service on 31.7.1991 and according to the workman since he was discharging function hitherto performed by Sri K.P. Chaurasia after his retirement, he is entitled to get salary as well as promotional grade. He raised Industrial dispute which was referred by the Sate Government vide Government order dated 31.1.1998 to the Labour Court and the reference made was whether the employers are liable to pay salary to the petitioner as admissible to the post of Junior Staff Grade F alongwith arrears and other emoluments and whether non-payment of the aforesaid wages is illegal if not what relief the petitioner is entitled to get. 3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties at prolix length and have also delved into the materials on record. 4. Sri Vijai Bahadur Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner canvassed that Raj Kumar Sharma workman, Opp. Party No. 2 was never promoted as Junior Staff Grade F attended with further submission that he was working as clerk in the wages section and he was subsequently transferred as clerk to look after the work at the main gate. He further canvassed that a similar dispute was raised by one Ram Autar Dwivedi who also was serving in the clerk cadre, claiming right of promotion and emoluments admissible to the post of Junior Staff Grade F but his claim in Adjudication Case No. 108 of 1984 was disallowed by the Labour Court vide award dated 15.10.1997. He further canvassed that a similar dispute was raised by one Ram Autar Dwivedi who also was serving in the clerk cadre, claiming right of promotion and emoluments admissible to the post of Junior Staff Grade F but his claim in Adjudication Case No. 108 of 1984 was disallowed by the Labour Court vide award dated 15.10.1997. He further canvassed that Ram Autar Dwivedi ranked senior to Raj Kumar Sharma. He further canvassed that the petitioner Mill was closed down in the year 1994 and eversince then no production has been made in the bill followed by submission that petitioner has already given marching orders under Voluntary Retirement Scheme and his matter relating to salary etc. has already been processed and drawn by the Opp. Party No. 2 which according to learned Counsel means final acceptance of all pending dues by the Opp. Party No. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also canvassed that there is no rule or regulation in existence under which the Opp. Party No. 2 can claim entitlement to promotion in the post and further that the Opp. Party No. 2 was never considered for promotion nor was ever given any promotion and by this reckoning, proceeds the submission, he is not entitled to get any salary of the post of Junior Staff F Grade. It is further submitted that the Labour Court erred in law in rendering award without there being any appointment or promotion of the Opp. Party. It is also submitted that while considering the case of Opp. Party, the Labour Court eschewed from consideration the number of persons senior to respondent No. 2 who were serving in the Mill attended with further submission that there is no post in existence like Junior Staff Grade F and further that the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the petitioner was ignored by the labour Court while rendering the award leaning in favour of Opp. Party No. 2. The learned Counsel also adverted attention of the Court to the fact that the petitioner has been declared as Sick Industry under the Sick Industrial Companies Act. The learned Counsel also drew attention of the Court to the pleading contained in para 20 of the written statement filed before the Labour Court pointing out that the pay scale of the clerical staff was Rs. 120-565 while the pay scale fixed for supervisor was Rs. The learned Counsel also drew attention of the Court to the pleading contained in para 20 of the written statement filed before the Labour Court pointing out that the pay scale of the clerical staff was Rs. 120-565 while the pay scale fixed for supervisor was Rs. 1620-3010 and again pay scale for Junior Officer was Rs. 1902 to 3225/- and the Labour Court without considering this aspect that no appointment or promotion was made wrongly converged to the decision leaning in favour of the Opp. Party No. 2 that he was entitled to salary of higher post without any right. Per contra, learned Counsel for the Opp. parties contended that Sri K.P. Chaurasia retired from service on 21.7.91 and thereafter he was transferred to the Main Gate to perform the function being performed by Sri K.P. Chaurasia and as such he shall be deemed to have discharged the function of Sri K.P. Chaurasia at the main gate and by this reckoning, the Opp. Party No. 2 is entitled to get salary and other emoluments admissible to the post held by Sri K.P. Chaurasia. 5. The undisputed facts as crystallizing from the submissions and materials on record are that in the year 1994, the petitioner Mill stopped making production and consequently, it was declared sick company and thereafter number of workers including petitioner opted for voluntary retirement under Voluntary Retirement Scheme. There is no denying of the fact that the petitioner had also opted for voluntary retirement and after accepting the same, he made a somersault and demanded difference of wages which he would have been entitled, had he been treated as having been promoted in place of Sri K.P. Chaurasia. 6. The other connected cases is Writ Petition No. 49987 which has been filed with the prayer that the respondents be commanded to provide the amount under the V.R.S. with interest on the date on which other employees received the amount i.e. July 2001. In this writ petition, this Court issued ad interim mandamus to the respondents to pay the amount due to the petitioner by reason of acceptance of V.R.S. within two months from the date of production of the order. Another writ petition is writ petition No. 8637 of 2001 which was filed by Elgin Mills in which challenge is to the impugned order dated 7.2.2001 and also to recovery pursuant to the impugned order. Another writ petition is writ petition No. 8637 of 2001 which was filed by Elgin Mills in which challenge is to the impugned order dated 7.2.2001 and also to recovery pursuant to the impugned order. This Court in this writ petition passed certain interim orders. Another writ petition is Writ Petition No. 43628 of 2001 which was filed by Raj Kumar Sharma for a writ of mandamus to enforce recovery certificate dated 1.3.2001 and 30.8.2001. All the writ petitions have been clubbed together. 7. The Labour Court has taken into account the fact that Sri K.P. Chaurasia who was holding the post as Junior Staff Grade-F had already retired on 31.8.1991 and petitioner thereafter was transferred to the main gate where he performed the function being performed by Sri K.P. Chaurasia and therefore it converged to the conclusion that the Opp. Party discharged the function being performed by Sri K.P. Chaurasia on the main gate and therefore he is entitled to get salary and designation of Junior Staff Grade F. 8. I have considered the arguments of the learned Counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the record. 9. The facts that workman is not claiming any right of promotion and entitlement to get salary as promoted employee and his prayer revolves round the argument that upon superannuation of Sri K.P. Chaurasia on 31.8.1991, who was holding charge of the post of Junior Staff Grade-F he was deployed at the gate for discharging functions performed by Sri K.P. Chaurasia and as such he is entitled to get wages for the period he discharged duties at the gate. There is no indicium on record to manifest that the Management ever authorized him to perform duties of Sri K.P. Chaurasia. The learned Counsel for the Opp. parties did not draw attention of the Court to any such authorization nor does it appear that it drew attention of the labour Court on this count. The argument that as the workman was deployed to perform duties at the main gate where Sri K.P. Chaurasia was discharging functions and there being no other official deployed at the gate holding office of Junior Staff Grade F he shall be deemed to have discharged same functions as Sri Chaurasia discharged at the main gate, does not commend to me for acceptance. It brooks no dispute that he was appointed as clerk and was discharging functions of a clerk and further that he was never promoted on a superior post or grade, he cannot stake claim to get any emoluments which Sri K.P. Chaurasia was drawing. It is on record that in the year 1991 onward, the manufacturing work of the Mill came to a stand still and ultimately in the year 1994, the Mill stopped making production of cloth and thereafter it was declared as a sick unit. The dispute relating to the aforesaid Mill was dragged before different authorities and Courts and ultimately Voluntary Retirement Scheme was floated in the Mill and many of the workmen opted for voluntary retirement under the said scheme including the Opp. Party and the same was accepted. In this conspectus, the claim of the workman that earlier on the main gate one person holding Junior Staff Grade-F was working at the gate and the workman/ Opp party was subsequently transferred there to work and after retirement of Sri Chaurasia, no other person having been deployed there to work in his place, he will be entitled to get salary and emoluments admissible to the post of Junior Staff Grade I, again does not commend to me for acceptance on any ground. It is worth noticing that there is due procedure prescribed for promotion/selection for an employee to a superior post/pay scale/grade and he must be selected/promoted to a superior grade in accordance with the service rules. Merely if an employee has been deployed to perform certain function at the main gate where some other senior employee was earlier serving does not entitle him to claim the super pay scale and emolument admissible to a superior personnel. The selection/promotion to an employee to superior post or other post is made within the parameters envisaged in the standing order or the rules and that too after considering the entire record and also the eligibility for promotion, a person after selection could be entitled to promotion or to a higher grade. Admittedly in the present case, neither any rule was brought to the notice of the Court that there is any chance of promotion of a clerk as officer nor any order is stated to have been passed for such selection/promotion. Concededly no such order was ever passed by the management promoting the Opp. Admittedly in the present case, neither any rule was brought to the notice of the Court that there is any chance of promotion of a clerk as officer nor any order is stated to have been passed for such selection/promotion. Concededly no such order was ever passed by the management promoting the Opp. Party No. 2 on the post held by Sri Chaurasia. Yet another aspect to be considered is that from the record it is eloquent that the Opp. party /workman was working on the relevant date in the pay scale of Rs. 122-3225 while the post on which he has staked claim was in the scale of Rs. 1900 to 3200 and in between the two grades, there was intervening post in the scale of Rs. 1620-4010 and further it is clear from the record that one Ram Autar Dubey a senior person in clerk cadre who also staked claim to promotion on the post of Junior Staff Grade F figured senior to Opp party No. 2 in seniority list while the Opp. Party/workman figured much below in the seniority list of the clerks. The claim staked by Sri Ram Autar Dubey who also claimed pay scale of Junior Staff Grade-F was turned down by same Labour Court. In the circumstances, the workman cannot get any promotion/appointment on the post held by Sri Chaurasia nor the pay scale. Besides, as stated supra, there is nothing on record to show that the management ever authorized in writing the workman to discharge the function of Sri Chaurasia on the post of Junior Staff Grade F. Only transfer to work at the main gate as clerk was made in view of reduction in production of cloth in the mill after 1984. To cap it all, no rule or standing or circular or any authority of law was cited before the Court by the learned Counsel to vouch for the fact that in case a clerk is transferred to discharge function at the main gate after retirement of officer of Junior Staff Grade F, can such person be entitled to get pay scale of superior post. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the irresistible conclusion which can be drawn in the perspective of the above discussion is that the labour Court acted illegally in holding the workman entitled to pay scale of the officer of superior grade i.e. Junior Staff Grade F and to promotion from 1.8.1991 and the impugned award in my considered view, rendered by the labour Court suffers from error apparent on the face of the record and is unsustainable in law. 10. It has been claimed by Sri Veer Bahadur Singh learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the workman concerned has already adopted for voluntary retirement under Voluntary Retirement Scheme and final retiral benefits have also been computed and calculated on the basis of salary for which he can be entitled on the date on the post of clerk and therefore, the claim of the workman that he is entitled to payment calculated on the basis of pay scale admissible to Junior Staff Grade-F falls short of acceptability. 11. In the light of above discussion, the petition succeeds and is allowed and the impugned award dated 29.6.2000 of the Labour Court being unsustainable is quashed accordingly. It needs hardly be said that workman/Opp. Party is entitled to retiral benefits under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme computed and calculated on the post of clerk in accordance with Rules. The petitioners are directed to make the entire payment due within two weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. 12. The other writ petitions being consequential are also disposed of accordingly in terms of the above directions/observations. ————