JUDGMENT : Narendra Nath Tiwari, J. In this writ petition, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing the award dated 6.9.2002 of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. I, Dhanbad. 2. The short fact of the case is that the concerned workmen claimed that they were engaged as co-operative workers at Kankanee Colliery' in 1987. They worked continuously till the year 1989 in the underground colliery as stone cutters, Tyandals performing the jobs like recovery and carrying of old pipes and installation of stopping, mud cleaning etc. under the direct control of the colliery Management. The work was for the benefit of the Management under their direct control But they were not given due wages. When they made a demand to that regard and claimed for their regularization, the Management stopped them from doing their duties. The concerned workmen, through the Sponsoring Union, ventilated their protest before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Dhanbad. The Assistant Labour Commissioner called upon the Management to submit necessary records concerning the concerned workmen in order to conciliate the disputes, but the Management did not produce any recored saying that the concerned workmen were engaged by the contractor and the Management had no concern with them. Due to the said adamant attitude on the part of the Management, the conciliation failed and on submission of failure report, the appropriate Government referred the dispute to learned Tribunal in the following terms: “Whether the 20 persons shown in the Annexure, who are stated to be Co-operative Workers, are to be deemed employees of the Management of Kankanee Colliery under Sijua Area of M/S B.C.C.L. and whether the demand that these persons be regularized in the services of the said Management, is justified ? If so, to what relief are the concerned persons entitled ?” The names of 20 persons were annexed as Annexure to the said reference. 3. The Management denied the claim of the concerned workmen. According to the Management, some persons had formed Co-operative Society in the name and style of 'Kankanee Shramik Sahyog Samity Ltd. The said Co-operative Society was given contract job of plantation of saplings and other miscellaneous jobs at Jogta Fire Project, which is not a mine. The basis of payment of the co-operative workers was the quantum of jobs done by them. The persons concerned were paid their wages by the Co-operative Society and not by the Management, of the colliery. The basis of payment of the co-operative workers was the quantum of jobs done by them. The persons concerned were paid their wages by the Co-operative Society and not by the Management, of the colliery. They were engaged in non-prohibited civil jobs of purely temporary nature. There is no relationship of employer and employees between the concerned workmen and the Management. The concerned workmen never worked under the control and supervision of the Management and they were never the employees of Kankanee Colliery. They were also not engaged to do any kind of underground work. The claim of the workers as such is wholly unjustified. 4. Both the parties led their evidences before learned Tribunal. After the evidences were closed and arguments were advanced by the parties, learned Tribunal considered the facts and necessary materials on record and came to the conclusion that all the concerned workmen, except one, had been working underground continuously for a period of 190 days in one calendar year i.e. in 1988. The nature of job done by them was of perennial. For regularization of the concerned workmen, the Management itself had taken initiative. A Joint Committee was formed consisting of representatives of both the sides, which conducted inspection of the records and submitted a report in support of the claim of the concerned workmen. But the Management sat over the matter. There was a clear circular in Ext. W/1 for absorption and regularization of the co-operative workers or contractor's workmen and on that basis several identically situated workmen were regularized by the Management. Learned Tribunal also considered the other fats, circumstances and materials on record and concluded that the concerned workmen were engaged for performing the jobs of the Management. They had been continuously working for a long period. The nature of work performed by them was of permanent and perennial nature and was of prohibited category. The Joint Committee report is also in favour of the workmen and as such their claim is justified. Learned Tribunal, thus, held that out of 20 persons shown in the Annexure to the order of the reference, except one Jiondra Yadav, whose name is at Sl. No. 17, all others are deemed to be the employees of the Management of the Kankanee Colliery under Sijua Area of M/S B.C.C.L. and that they deserve to be regularized in the services of the Management. No. 17, all others are deemed to be the employees of the Management of the Kankanee Colliery under Sijua Area of M/S B.C.C.L. and that they deserve to be regularized in the services of the Management. Learned Tribunal, accordingly, directed the Management to regularize the services of 19 concerned workmen. 5. Mr. A.K. Mehta, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, submitted that the impugned award is perverse and illegal and the same has been rendered without properly considering the facts and the materials on record as well as the decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd. and Others etc. etc. Vs. National Union Water Front Workers and Others etc. etc. 2001 (7) SCC 1 , Learned Tribunal without coming to the finding that the contract work allotted to the contractor was sham and camouflage, has erroneously held that the concerned workmen are entitled for absorption. It has been submitted that as per the decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Steel Authority of India Ltd. (Supra) the concerned workmen are not entitled to automatic absorption even if it is found that they were working against the prohibited nature of job. The finding regarding the employees and employer relationship between the Management and the concerned workmen is also without any basis. The impugned award for the said reasons is not sustainable and is liable to be quashed. 6. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the concerned workmen-Respondent, on the other hand, submitted that the impugned award of learned Tribunal is based on due appreciation of the facts and materials on record and there is no infirmity or illegality warranting any interference with the impugned award in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Court. The points raised for assailing the said award are the same which were raised by the Management before learned Tribunal. The same were duly considered and answered by the Tribunal referring the relevant facts and evidences on record. The finding of learned Tribunal is based on the admitted documents and there is absolutely no error in the impugned award. Learned Counsel further submitted that the Steel Authority of India case (Supra) was decided on different facts and the said decision is not applicable to the facts of the instant case. 7. The finding of learned Tribunal is based on the admitted documents and there is absolutely no error in the impugned award. Learned Counsel further submitted that the Steel Authority of India case (Supra) was decided on different facts and the said decision is not applicable to the facts of the instant case. 7. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and considered their submissions in the light of the facts and the materials available on record. I have also perused the impugned award. Learned Tribunal has elaborately dealt with the evidences on record and has also taken notice of the reference of the Petitioner's dispute to the Joint Committee formed by the Management. The Joint Committee on scrutinizing all the relevant records and holding inspection on the spot, furnished a report Ext. W/3 which supported the claim of the concerned workmen. Learned Tribunal further found after discussing and appreciating the evidences on record that the concerned workmen were engaged for performing the jobs of the Management and they worked continuously for a long period and performed the job of permanent and perennial nature which as per the NCWA is of prohibited category and as such they are deemed to be the employees of the Management of the Kankanee Colliery under Sijua Area of M/S B.C.C.L. According to the policy decision, they deserve to be regularized in the service of the Management. 8. The said finding and conclusion of learned Tribunal is well founded and supported by sound reasons. The decision of the Apex Court in the Steel Authority of India Ltd. case (Supra) relied upon by learned Counsel for the Petitioner was rendered on different facts and the same is not applicable to the facts of the instant case. 9. I, therefore, find no infirmity or illegality or any ground made out in this writ petition warranting any interference with the impugned award. 10. This writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.