Judgment :- These writ petitions are filed by respective Trade Unions operating in the Tuticorin Port Trust. Some of them are affiliated to Central Federations operating all over India and some of them are the unit Trade Unions. 2. The prayer in the writ petitions is for a direction to the 2nd respondent viz., the Chairman of the Tuticorin Port Trust to treat the interim relief paid to Class 3 and Class 4 employees with effect from 01.01.1986 to 312. 1987 as pay for all purposes including the pensionary benefits and further direct the 2nd respondent to grant monetary benefits to the members of the respective Trade Unions with interest. 3. The writ petitions were admitted on several dates. However, the prayer for interim relief was denied by this Court on the ground that unless the petitioners succeed, the question of granting any interim relief may not arise. 4. The Union of India as well as the Port Trust have filed counter affidavits resisting the claim made by the petitioner Unions. 5. In the counter affidavit filed by the Union of India dated 26.07.2000, it is clearly stated that all the major Trade Union Federations and the Managements of various Port Trusts in India have entered into a settlement, which is broadly based upon the guidelines issued by the department of Public Enterprise. Under the guidelines the scales of pay for Class I and Class II of employees under the Port Trust and Class III and Class IV are entirely different footing and they take effect from different dates. In paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit, it is averred as follows:- ".... In the case of Class III and Class IV employees and workers, the wage settlements were effective for five years from 1. 1988, 1. 1993 and so on. On the other hand in the case of Class I and Class II Officers the pay revisions were effective 1. 87, 1. 92, and so on. Clause 6.2 (Annexure 1) of the Wage Settlement clearly stipulates that the Payment of Interim Relief granted to Class III and IV employees with effect from 1. 1986, vide Government Order No.LB-12011/5/87-RO(ii) dated 10. 87 (Annexure II) will be discontinued with effect from 1. 1988 due to absorption of interim relief in the new Wage Structure as per the settlement. Clause 6.2 (Annexure 1) of the Wage Settlement clearly stipulates that the Payment of Interim Relief granted to Class III and IV employees with effect from 1. 1986, vide Government Order No.LB-12011/5/87-RO(ii) dated 10. 87 (Annexure II) will be discontinued with effect from 1. 1988 due to absorption of interim relief in the new Wage Structure as per the settlement. The granting of such an interim relief to the serving employees on or after 1. 1988 will be a duplication of payment and will result in huge financial implications which will cause insufferable damage to the ports. Such a decision will also have repercussions on the on going Bipartite Wage Negotiations Committee which is in the process of finalizing the wage settlement to be effective from 1. 1998. In the case of employees who are in service on or after 1. 1988, their pay was fixed in the revised scales of pay and that revised scales of pay include the elements of the said interim relief on account of absorption of the interim relief in the revised wage structure. The counting of interim relief is admissible as pay only to those who are not getting the benefit of fixation in the revised scales effective from 1. 1988 due to retirement or death prior to 1. 1988". 6. In the counter affidavit filed by the Tuticorin Port Trust dated 211. 1999, a similar stand has been taken. In paragraph 16, it is averred as follows:- "16. With regard to the averments made in para 12 of the affidavits, this respondent submits that as per Clause 6.2 of the Wage Settlement, the interim relief granted to Class III and Class IV employees w.e.f. 1. 1986 vide Ministry of Surface Transport letter dated 10. 1987 will be discontinued with effect from 1. 1988 following the absorption of interim relief in the new wage structure. As the settlement itself provided for the absorption of interim relief in the new wage structure and signed by both the Federations of Port and Dock Workers and Managements of the Port Trusts, the interim relief was not added as a separate element in the fitment. There is, therefore, no mistake to be rectified to arrive at the correct pay scale". 7. There is, therefore, no mistake to be rectified to arrive at the correct pay scale". 7. It is also stated in paragraph 18 that when a strike notice given by various federations of Port workers, it was brought to their notice that the order of the Ministry was made applicable to Class III and Class IV employees and workers of Major Ports and Dock Labour Boards who retired, expired or resigned during the period from 01.01.1986 to 312. 1987 and when the same was brought to the notice of the Union, they decided to withdraw their industrial dispute. 8. A copy of the settlement entered into between the parties is also filed in the typed set of papers by both sides. The settlement dated 12.06.1989 is signed by the Major Trade Union Federations of workmen including HMS, INTUC, AITUC, and CITU. With reference to fixed Dearness Allowance, paragraph No.6.2, reads as follows:- "6.2 Payment of Interim Relief granted to Class III and IV employees with effect from 1. 1986 vide Government Order No.LB-12011/87-R.O.(ii) dated 010. 1987 will be discontinued with effect from 1. 1988 following the absorption of interim relief in the new wage structure as in this Settlement". 9. It is needless to state that such a settlement is binding on all the workmen working in all the Major Ports and there cannot be any challenge to the said settlement. Even in the present cases, there is no challenge to the settlement as it is and merely a direction is sought for and that too against the Tuticorin Port Trust. The Tuticorin Port Trust is also bound by the Settlement and it cannot operate as an independent entity. Especially coming under the control of the Ministry of Surface Transport it cannot take a different stand from other Major Ports. 10. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that subsequent to the Settlement dated 12.06.1989, there has been subsequent settlements dated 012. 1994 and 02.08.2000 on various service conditions including retirement benefits. Therefore, there is no question of challenge or any direction contrary to the earlier settlement can be made. 11. 10. It is also brought to the notice of the Court that subsequent to the Settlement dated 12.06.1989, there has been subsequent settlements dated 012. 1994 and 02.08.2000 on various service conditions including retirement benefits. Therefore, there is no question of challenge or any direction contrary to the earlier settlement can be made. 11. Apart from other issues, when the Pay Commission fixes higher scale of pay, any amount paid by way of personal pay or any other sum, naturally could be merged with the revised scales of pay and the petitioner Trade Unions cannot claim a different treatment than that of the other employees working in other Major Port Trusts. Under the circumstances, all the writ petitions are misconceived and will stand dismissed. No costs.