JUDGMENT : V.M. Kanade, J. Petitioner is the Co-operative Society running a sugar factory. Respondent is an approved Union for the employees employed in the Petitioner Society. Petitioner is challenging the award passed by the Industrial Court dated 04/11/2008 in Reference (IC) No. 2 of 2000 whereby the Industrial Court was pleased to direct the Petitioner Society to give the pay-scale of unskilled employees to the daily rated and substitute employees on their completion of six months uninterrupted service in the preceding 12 months with notional benefits from 01/01/1998 along with other increments from the date of the order. 2. Brief facts which are relevant for the purpose of deciding the present Petition are as under: 3. There was registered agreement between the Karkhana and employees dated 07/06/1996 which was in force from 01/01/1994 to 31/12/1997 in respect of wages which were to be paid to its employees. Respondent, however, terminated the said agreement by notice dated 06/09/1998 and a dispute was raised by giving notice of change in respect of Wages, Dearness Allowance, Fitment, Service Increments, Retention Allowance, House Rent Allowance etc. dated 15/09/1999. A demand for increment was mentioned in the annexure to the said letter. Since dispute was not resolved, the matter was referred to the Industrial Court, Pune and a Statement of Claim was filed on behalf of representative Union for the Sugar Industry in the local area of Taluka Daund, District Pune under the provisions of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. 4. In the said Karkhana of the Petitioner Society there are 12 categories of employees and, apart from these 12 categories, there are daily rated workers in all the 12 categories. The Union, therefore, claimed increase in wages even for such category of daily rated employees. Written Statement was filed by the Karkhana and it was stated that the Employees' Federation have taken pains to arrive at a common pattern on the basis of principle of region-cum-industry and also taken into consideration the peculiar nature of the working of the sugar factory and all the parties had made recommendations which were given effect to by both the parties. In the said Written Statement it was submitted that the daily rated employees were excluded from the operation of settlement since the employees of such category were temporary since they had worked from one factory to another and it was alleged that their service conditions were uniform all over State of Maharashtra. The allegations of exploitation by Karkhana made in the Statement of Claim were denied by Karkhana. It was further stated in the Written Statement that the Sugar Industry was facing situation of crisis due to globalization and other factors and it was not possible to bear the burden of increase in salary. During the pendency of reference, there was an amicable settlement between the parties and an award was passed by Shri Sharad Pawar which was made applicable to the 12 categories of employees and the said award was accepted by the Petitioner -Society. No recommendation, however, was made in respect of the daily rated workers who are appointed in the said 12 categories. Industrial Court, therefore, proceeded to decide the reference qua the daily rated workers. Industrial Court partly allowed the reference and directed that all those daily rated and substitute employees who had completed six months uninterrupted service in the preceding 12 months should be given notional benefits from 01/01/1998 and further increments from the date of the order. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, Society has preferred this Writ Petition. 5. Mr. Lokhande, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that it is well settled by several judgments of the Apex Court and this Court that while taking into consideration application for wage increase, Industrial Court has to take into consideration the criteria of region-cum-industry basis. It is submitted that this criteria is taken into consideration as laid down by the Apex Court. It is further submitted that the Industrial Court erred in treating the permanent and seasonal permanent at par with the other categories of employees, overlooking the seasonal nature of the sugar industry. It is further submitted that the Industrial Court had erred in awarding raise in wages to the respondent without considering the financial difficulty of the Petitioner Society. It is further submitted that the Industrial Court also had erred in granting House Rent Allowance and Retention Allowance on the basis of the recommendation made by the Board. It is further submitted that the Industrial Court had erred in awarding raise in wages to the respondent without considering the financial difficulty of the Petitioner Society. It is further submitted that the Industrial Court also had erred in granting House Rent Allowance and Retention Allowance on the basis of the recommendation made by the Board. It is further submitted that the Industrial Court did not take into consideration all the documents which are filed by the Petitioner. Further, it is submitted that the Industrial Court had not considered the oral evidence of the Chief Accountant Shri Bhalchandra More, General Secretary of the Respondent. 6. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the Karkhana had accepted the award given by Shri Sharad Pawar and had increased the wages of 12 categories of employees. It is, therefore, submitted that the Industrial Court had merely awarded wage raise to the daily rated employees by dividing the amount per month by 26 days which was the recommendation given by the Board in para 33(viii). It is submitted that recommendations made by the Board were binding on the Sugar Industry and it had a statutory force. The learned Counsel submitted that the Industrial Court had observed that in spite of financial inability of Karkhana, Karkhana had accepted recommendations made by Shri Sharad Pawar in respect of 12 categories of employees and payment of arrears was made to these employees with effect from 01-01-1998. It is submitted that the Industrial Court, under these circumstances, observed that if the Karkhana could give wage raise in spite of its financial inability, it could very well, therefore, give wage raise to the daily rated workers, as, by virtue of the provisions of Model Standing Orders, they were deemed to be permanent employees on their completion of 240 days of service in the Karkhana. 7. I have heard the Counsel for both parties at length. There cannot be any dispute about the well settled position in law that the Industrial Court while taking into consideration the demand for wage raise has to take into consideration the principle of industry-com-region basis. It is true that no witness has been examined by the Union to prove on record the comparable wages which are given to employees and daily rated employees working in sugar factories in the region and throughout the State of Maharashtra. It is true that no witness has been examined by the Union to prove on record the comparable wages which are given to employees and daily rated employees working in sugar factories in the region and throughout the State of Maharashtra. There cannot be any dispute about the ratio of the judgments of the Apex Court and this Court on which reliance is placed by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners. The financial status of the Karkhana also is evident from various balance-sheets and financial statements which are brought on record by the Karkhana which does indicate that Karkhana has been suffering losses for number of years. However, in the present case, the Industrial Court, in my view, has rightly taken into consideration the fact that the Karkhana, in spite of its financial status, had proceeded to accept the award which was given by Shri Sharad Pawar who was pleased to award wage raise to the 12 categories of workmen, more particularly described in the annexure to the wage demand made by the Union. Industrial Court has also noted that the Karkhana has also given arrears to these 12 categories of workmen from 1998 and is also paying them wage raise as recommended by Shri Sharad Pawar in his award. Industrial Court, therefore, was of the view that since the demand of the daily rated workmen in the said 12 categories was based on the basis of the demand of wage raise made by these 12 categories of workmen and as per the recommendations of the statutory Board which had made its recommendations in para 33(viii) and which recommendations had been accepted by the Karkhana, it was not necessary to consider the principle of industry-cum-region basis. This submission made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, therefore, cannot be accepted. This submission made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, therefore, cannot be accepted. So far as the second submission regarding jurisdiction of the Industrial Court to decide the question about permanency of these daily rated workmen is concerned, in an earlier reference it was decided that the daily rated workmen who had worked for 240 days were deemed to be permanent employees and the Industrial Court, after taking into consideration the decision given in the earlier reference and also taking into consideration the Model Standing Orders, has, in my view, rightly come to the conclusion that those daily rated workmen who were working in the Sugar Industry for more than 240 days in a year were deemed to be the permanent employees. In my view, therefore, Industrial Court was justified in making the said observation and, therefore, had rightly proceeded to consider the wage demand of all these categories of workmen. It has been brought on record by the Secretary of the Union that some of these daily rated workmen have been working since last 20 years and no wage increase had been given to them at least since 1986. 8. Industrial Court, therefore, in my view, has taken into consideration the evidence which has been brought on record not only by the Chief Accountant of the Petitioner's Karkhana but also of the General Secretary and other witnesses who have been examined on behalf of the Union. Therefore, the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner cannot be accepted. However, there is some substance in the submission made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner that the Industrial Court had erred in granting arrears to the daily rated workmen from 1998 without taking into consideration the financial status of the Karkhana. It is rightly submitted that the application for wage raise was filed by the Union in the year 2000-2001. That being the position, in my view, Industrial Court should have taken into consideration this aspect. The order, therefore, granting arrears to these daily rated workmen from 1998 will have to be set aside. However, the fact remains that the Karkhana has paid arrears to the permanent seasonal and temporary employees from 1998 and these arrears were paid in 2004-2005. 9. The order, therefore, granting arrears to these daily rated workmen from 1998 will have to be set aside. However, the fact remains that the Karkhana has paid arrears to the permanent seasonal and temporary employees from 1998 and these arrears were paid in 2004-2005. 9. The Karkhana, therefore, in spite of its financial status, did have adequate funds at its disposal atleast in 2004-2005. In my view, therefore, under these circumstances, the Karkhana, if it could pay the arrears to the permanent and other employees in 2004-2005, there is no reason why these daily rated workmen who were getting wages at almost 1/3rd rate of permanent employees should get less wages and should not be paid arrears from 2004. The said order of the Industrial Court, therefore, to that extent will have to be partly modified. 10. The said order of the Industrial Court therefore is partly modified and it is directed that the notional benefit should be given to these daily rated workmen from 01/01/2004 and they should be paid arrears from 2004. 11. Writ Petition is partly allowed in the aforesaid terms and disposed of.