ORDER : T. Raja, J. The Writ Petition No. 24307 of 2003 has been filed by the Management of Melanmai Iyakkunar, Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, Chennai as against the Award dated 24.1.2003 passed in I.D. No. 48 of 2001, in which, the second respondent, the Industrial Tribunal held that the employees, who are working in the Association were entitled for regularization from the date of passing of the Award i.e. on 24.1.2003. One another Writ Petition No. 38164 of 2003 has been filed by the Secretary, Tamil Nadu Kudineer Vadigal Variya Ooliyar Mathiya Amaippu (CITU), Chennai aggrieved by the award dated 24.1.2003 passed in I.D. No. 48 of 2001 complaining that even though the impugned order directed the regularization of the employees, those who are working in the Association from the date of passing of the award namely on 24.1.2003, they were given benefit only from 1.8.2006. Therefore, when they are deprived of the regular time scale of pay from the date of appointment, the Writ Petition No. 38164 of 2003 has been filed for modification of the said award seeking regularization from the date of appointment of the workmen concerned. Yet another Writ Petition No. 29418 of 2008 has been filed by E. Viswanathan, General Secretary, Tamil Nadu Kudineer Vadigal Mathiya Amaippu (CITU), Chennai against G.O. Ms. No. 111, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (WS 5) Department dated 29.9.006 of the first respondent. The Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board is a statutory body created by the Government under the Tamil Nadu Water supply and Drainage Board Act, 1970 (Tamil Nadu Act 4 of 1970). The main function of the Board is to execute water supply schemes at the instance of the Government. After the schemes were completed, it was handed over to the local bodies for maintenance along with the staff. As the schemes were not properly maintained by the local bodies, the Government, by issuance of G.O. Ms. No. 454 MA & WS, dated 22.8.1995 took back the schemes without the workmen attached to the schemes. Therefore, the workmen of the local bodies challenged the said G.O. Ms. No. 454 in writ petition No. 12822 of 1995 and the said G.O. was upheld by this Court. As against the same, Writ Appeal No. 2106 of 1999 has been filed before this Court and the same is pending. Therefore, the workmen of the local bodies challenged the said G.O. Ms. No. 454 in writ petition No. 12822 of 1995 and the said G.O. was upheld by this Court. As against the same, Writ Appeal No. 2106 of 1999 has been filed before this Court and the same is pending. In the meantime, 12(3) settlement was entered into by the Board on 8.8.1996. Based on the said 12(3) settlement, the TWAD Board regularized the services of the workmen, who had put in 480 days of continuous service in two consecutive calendar years in the TWAD Board. For further maintenance, the Government issued G.O. Ms. No. 261 MA & WS, dated 14.10.1996 for appointment of persons on consolidated basis with annual increment at 10% for five years in the category of Electrical Superintendent, Electrician, Fitter and Maintenance Assistants. The persons, who had been working in the local bodies were appointed only for a period of 5 years. Hence, the first respondent Union has raised in I.D. No. 48 of 2001 before Industrial Tribunal several issues including permanency of daily wage workers and to grant salary, annual increment and other benefits. Thereafter, the Industrial Tribunal passed the award in favour of the respondent Association in I.D. No. 48 of 2001 stating that the respondent Association is entitled for regularization from the date of Award. Aggrieved by the said award, Writ Petition No. 24307 of 2003 has been filed. 2. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner in W.P. No 24307 of 2003 would submit that when a reference was made before the Industrial Tribunal on the issue of parity of pay on par with the similarly placed persons, the Industrial Tribunal has gone beyond the scope of reference and wrongly passed the impugned Award granting direction to the TWAD Board to regularize the service of the workmen on completion of continuous service of 480 days. Therefore, the impugned award passed by the Industrial Tribunal beyond its scope, is liable to be set aside. 3. In his further submission, it was stated that at the time of maintaining the schemes by the local bodies, the Government subsequently, on finding fault with the administration of the local bodies, has taken over the work, which has been discharged by the local bodies without the workmen attached to these schemes. 3. In his further submission, it was stated that at the time of maintaining the schemes by the local bodies, the Government subsequently, on finding fault with the administration of the local bodies, has taken over the work, which has been discharged by the local bodies without the workmen attached to these schemes. As per 12(3) settlement reached between the TWAD Board and the first respondent in W.P. No. 24307 of 2003 namely, Seyalalar, Tamil Nadu Kudineer Vadigal Variya Ooliyar Mathiya Amaippu (CITU), Chepauk, the employees, who had put in 480 days of continuous service in two consecutive calendar years were regularised, Accordingly, the persons, who are before this Court were appointed pursuant to CO, Ms. No. 261, MA & WS Department dated 14.10.1996. In the said G.O., it is specifically stated that the appointment of persons was made only on consolidated basis with annual increment at 10% for five years in the category of Electrical Superintendent, Electrician, Fitters and Maintenance Assistants. Though the above said G.O. Ms. No. 261 was not challenged before the Tribunal, the Tribunal, instead of considering the service of the employees, who are working in the Association, has wrongly given direction to TWAD Board to regularize the service of the employees on completion of continuous service of 480 days. Even this direction also is running contrary to the ratio laid down by this Court in Writ Appeal Nos. 665 to 669 of 2010 and W.P. Nos. 15893 to 15896 of 2009 dated 21.6.2010. On the above said basis, he has prayed for setting aside the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal by the interference of this Court. 4. While elaborating his arguments, the learned senior counsel has submitted that when the Government issued G.O. (Ms). No. 111 Municipal Administration and Water Supply (WS 5) Department, dated 29.9.2006, it has accepted the proposal of the Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board permitting to regularize the services of 872 consolidated pay employees of Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board in the category of Electricians, Fitters and Maintenance Assistants who were appointed prior to 2.3.2001 and bring them into regular time scale of pay with effect from 1.8.2006. Accordingly, the TWAD Board, has regularized the services of the said 872 employees and has given benefit with effect from 1.8.2006. Accordingly, the TWAD Board, has regularized the services of the said 872 employees and has given benefit with effect from 1.8.2006. While so, when the respondent has raised the dispute in I.D. No. 48 of 2001, the Industrial Tribunal has wrongly come to the conclusion that the respondent Association is entitled for regularization from the date of award and has given direction to the TWAD Board to regularize the services of the employees u/s 3 of the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishment (Conferment) of Permanent Status Workmen Act, 1981 on completion of continuous service of 480 days. 5. It was further submitted that though 872 employees were granted regularization as per G.O. (Ms). No. 111 Municipal Administration and Water Supply (WS 5) Department, dated 29.9.2006, the direction given u/s 3 of the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishment (Conferment) of Permanent Status Workmen Act, 1981 by the Tribunal that all the workmen appointed on consolidated basis were subsequently, appointed on four categories i.e., Electrical Superintendent, Electricians, Fitter and Maintenance Assistants provided they were granted regularization on completion of service of 480 days is unsustainable. 6. The learned senior counsel has further submitted even though, the Division Bench in W.A. Nos. 665 to 669 of 2010 and W.P. Nos. 15893 to 15896 of 2009, dated 21.6.2010 has given the benefit of time scale of pay with effect from 1.4.1998, subsequently, an application was filed to correct the said error. Inadvertently, such application was not brought to the notice of this Court. In any event, the mandate given u/s 3 of the Act to grant permanent status to the employees on completion of 480 days is unjustifiable. Therefore, this Court, he pleaded may finally, consider that when the members of the respondent Association ought to be granted benefit of permanent status in accordance with Section 3 of the Act, the benefit given by the petitioner TWARD Board from 1.8.2006 in terms of the G.O. (Ms). No. 111 Municipal Administration and Water Supply (WS 5) Department has extended maximum benefit to the employees of the respondent Association, who is the petitioner in W.P. No. 38164 of 2003. 7. In reply, Mr. R. Yashod Vardhan, learned senior counsel for Mr. M. Muthupandian, learned counsel for the first respondent has submitted that it is not open to the petitioner to take different yardstick while filing the present Writ Petition in W.P. No. 24307 of 2003. 7. In reply, Mr. R. Yashod Vardhan, learned senior counsel for Mr. M. Muthupandian, learned counsel for the first respondent has submitted that it is not open to the petitioner to take different yardstick while filing the present Writ Petition in W.P. No. 24307 of 2003. On the basis of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 665 to 669 of 2010 and W.P. Nos. 15893 to 15896 of 2009 dated 21.6.2010, benefits were granted to the similarly placed persons, hence, it is not open to the petitioner TWAD Board to give a different or lesser benefit that would amount to discrimination, which will not be permitted under Article 14 of the Constitution. On this basis, he prayed for granting benefit of the Award dated 24.1.2003 by directing the petitioner Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board to extend the benefit to the employees from the date of appointment. 8. It was also further argued that admittedly all the employees of the first respondent were appointed by the local bodies to take care of the work undertaken by the petitioner TWAD Board. It is an admitted fact that when the employees have continued the work from the date of their appointment, the TWAD Board itself came forward to execute water supply scheme along with the employees of the local bodies. Therefore, the refusal of accepting the award dated 24.1.2003 by the petitioner TWAD Board to give regularization to the services of the employees cannot be permitted. In any event, this Court has taken similar stand that when the benefit of time scale of pay was already granted to the employees from 1.4.1998, on which they have joined in the service of the Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board, at least as to why the said benefit should not be given while confirming the permanent status of the employees from 1.8.2006 as per G.O. (Ms). No. 111 Municipal Administration and Water Supply (WS 5) Department, dated 29.9.2006. 9. It is not open to the petitioner TWAD Board to raise dispute with all the employees of the Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board. The TWAD Board executed water supply schemes at the instance of the Government and on completion of the same handed over to the local bodies for maintenance along with the staff. 9. It is not open to the petitioner TWAD Board to raise dispute with all the employees of the Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board. The TWAD Board executed water supply schemes at the instance of the Government and on completion of the same handed over to the local bodies for maintenance along with the staff. On finding fault with the local bodies, the TWAD Board by issuing G.O. Ms. No. 454/MA & WS Department dated 22.8.1995 has taken back the schemes without the workmen attached to the schemes. Subsequently, a Writ Petition No. 12822 of 1995 was filed by the workers and the same was upheld by this Court and as against the same a writ appeal was also filed. Meanwhile, 12(3) settlement was entered into by the TWAD Board and according to the settlement, the employees, who had put in 480 days of continuous service in two consecutive calendar years, were regularized. Thereafter, the TWAD Board issued G.O. Ms. No. 261 MA & WS Department dated 14.10.1996 for appointment of persons on consolidated basis with annual increment of 10% for five years in the category of Electrical Superintendent, Electrician, Fitters and Maintenance Assistants. But, these workers were denied benefits available under the regular employment. Therefore, when some of the workmen challenged the provisions of the I.D. Act by raising industrial disputes in various Labour Courts, result of which, the Labour Courts also have passed the award directing the reinstatement of those workers, who were terminated by the petitioner TWAD Board with continuity of service and backwages. Therefore, the similarly placed persons, who had been denied permanency even after the completion of 480 days in terms of Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishment (Conferment of Permanent Status) to workmen Act 1981, had also approached the Authority under the said Act for conferring permanent status from the date of completion of 480 days. Finally, when industrial dispute was raised before the Industrial Tribunal, the Industrial Tribunal, on considering the case of the petitioner with reference to the similarly placed persons, passed the award directing the petitioner Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board to regularize the services of the employees on completion of continuous service of 480 days from the award dated 24.1.2003. Finally, when industrial dispute was raised before the Industrial Tribunal, the Industrial Tribunal, on considering the case of the petitioner with reference to the similarly placed persons, passed the award directing the petitioner Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board to regularize the services of the employees on completion of continuous service of 480 days from the award dated 24.1.2003. When the benefit of conferment of Permanent status was granted, all the employees were granted regularization on completion of 480 days from 1.8.2006 in terms of G.O. (Ms). No. 111 Municipal Administration and Water Supply (WS 5) Department, dated 29.9.2006. When the issue raised in the present writ petition is also similar to the one raised and decided by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. Nos. 665 to 669 of 2010 and W.P. Nos. 15893 to 15896 of 2009, dated 21.6.2010, this Court is also bound by the same judgment. 10. Further, the learned senior counsel has also argued that all the workmen in the respondent Association are entitled to get benefit u/s 3 of the Act. The prayer made by Mr. Yashod Vardhan, learned senior counsel for the first respondent that to give benefit of time scale of pay from the date of the appointment by the petitioner Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board to the members of the employees Association cannot be considered positively, as it otherwise amounts to stretch the rights of the employees beyond the mandate given u/s 3 of the Act. Therefore, this Court while confirming the permanent status of all the employees, directs the petitioner Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board to give benefit to the employees, who had completed 480 working days in two consecutive calendar years. With the above said direction, the Writ Petition No. 24307 of 2003 is disposed of. It is needless to state that the employees, who had completed 480 working days in two consecutive calendar years, shall get benefit of time scale of pay from 1.8.2006 and also shall get monetary benefits in terms of G.O. (Ms). No. 111 Municipal Administration and Water Supply (WS 5) Department, dated 29.9.2006. In view of the order passed in the above Writ Petition No. 24307 of 2003, Writ Petition Nos. 38164 of 2003 and 29418 of 2007 are closed. There is no order as to costs.