JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are, that the State Government made reference under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act before the Industrial Tribunal, Kota vide notification dated 3rd June, 1997, as to, whether the action of the employer for not granting regular pay scale to workman w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 in place of 1st April, 1989 was just and valid? If not, to what relief, the workman is entitled to? 3. The Industrial Tribunal, vide its award dated 18th November, 1999, answered the reference in favour of the workman holding that workman Karam Singh is entitled for regular pay scale w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 after his regularisation from the said date and action of employer in not regularising him and in not making payment of regular pay scale w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 in place of 1st April, 1989 is not just and valid. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid direction, the employer filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 699/2001 before Single Bench, which was dismissed vide order dated 2nd July, 2001. Being aggrieved with the order of Single Bench, the employer preferred present intra- court appeal. 4. It is relevant to mention that intra-court appeal filed by appellant was dismissed by Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 1st May, 2003. However, after grant of special leave petition, filed on behalf of employer/appellant, the Civil Appeal No. 1042/2006 was allowed by the Hon'ble Apex Court and after setting aside the order of this Court dated 1st May, 2003, remitted the matter to this Court for de novo consideration in the light of law laid down in Civil Appeal No. 254/2004, which was decided along with Civil Appeal No. 1042/2006. 5. Submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the Industrial Tribunal examined the case of workman beyond term of reference. The Tribunal, not only directed to pay regular pay scale to workman w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 but also directed to regularise him w.e.f. 1st April, 1983, which is per se illegal. He submitted that Screening Committee had already considered the case of workman for award of regular pay scale as well as for regularisation w.e.f. 1st April, 1989. The Tribunal, not only directed to pay regular pay scale to workman w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 but also directed to regularise him w.e.f. 1st April, 1983, which is per se illegal. He submitted that Screening Committee had already considered the case of workman for award of regular pay scale as well as for regularisation w.e.f. 1st April, 1989. He further submitted that the term of reference before the Industrial Tribunal was in respect of award of regular pay scale from 1st April, 1983 and there was no reference with regard to regularisation of workman w.e.f. 1st April, 1983. He therefore, submitted that award passed by Industrial Tribunal for regularisation of workman w.e.f. 15t April, 1983 be set aside. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent/ workman fairly and frankly admitted that in view of order of Rajasthan State Electricity Board dated 15th January, 1988 (Annexure- 4 annexed with the writ petition) it was directed that the Screening Committee was required to consider the case of workman for grant of regular pay scale w.e.f. 1st April, 1983, who have completed two years continuous service up to/as on 31st March, 1983. So far as regularisation of workman is concerned, the Screening Committee was required to adjudge the suitability of those workman after identifying each such workman is engaged against jobs of regular/permanent nature or otherwise, recruited only for some temporary jobs required for specific period which may, for one reason or other, have continued beyond the period originally specified. It was also specifically mentioned that those workman who was engaged against the jobs which was of regular/permanent nature will only be considered for regularisation. The workman was not fulfilling the criteria for regularisation w.e.f. 1st April, 1983. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent fairly submitted that the Tribunal could not have given direction in favour of workman/ respondent regarding his regularisation w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 but so far as award passed by Tribunal awarding regular pay scale w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 is concerned, same is justified and is fully covered by the order of appellant Board dated 15th January, 1988. 8. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 9. 8. We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 9. For ready reference, order of appellant Board dated 15th January, 1988 (Annexure- 4) is reproduced as under: "A Screening Committee was constituted vide order no.RSEB/Karmik/ F.20(2)/D.1806 dated 26th September, 1983, to adjudge the suitability of work charged/casual monthly or daily rated workmen in accordance with the criteria and procedure laid down therein. The same Committee is hereby further authorised to screen those work charged/casual-monthly or daily rated workmen who have completed 2 years continuous service as on 31st March, 1983 or thereafter and are continuing in Board's service, to adjudge their suitability for regularisation and grant of regular Pay Scale as under: Classification Date from which regular Pay Scale is to be given (A) Those who have completed 2 years years' continuous service upto/as on 31.3.83 and have been continuing in Board's service thereafter. 01/04/83 (B) Those who have completed 2 years' continuous- service upto/as on 31.3.84 and have been continuing in Board's service thereafter 01/04/84 (C) Those who have completed 2 years' continuous service upto/as on 31.3.85 and have been continuing in Board's service thereafter. 01/04/85 (D) Those who have completed 2 years' continuous service upto/as on 31.3.86 and have been continuing in Board's service thereafter. 01/04/86 (E) Those who have completed 2 years' continuous service upto as on 31.3.87 and have been continuing in Board's service thereafter. 01/04/87 Before adjudging the suitability of these persons the Committee will identify each such workman as to whether these workmen have been engaged against the jobs of regular/permanent nature or they were recruited only for. some temporary jobs required for specific period which may, for one reasons or other, have continued beyond the period originally specified. Those who were engaged against the jobs which were of regular/permanent nature, will only be considered for regularisation. Other conditions laid down in the aforesaid order will be applicable in this case also. This work will be completed within 30 days." 10. From the above order, it is clear that the respondent workman could have been awarded only regular pay scale w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 as admittedly he had completed two years' service as on 31st March, 1983. Other conditions laid down in the aforesaid order will be applicable in this case also. This work will be completed within 30 days." 10. From the above order, it is clear that the respondent workman could have been awarded only regular pay scale w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 as admittedly he had completed two years' service as on 31st March, 1983. So far as regularisation of respondent workman w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 is concerned, the same was adjudged by Screening Committee and he was not found suitable for regularisation w.e.f. 1st April, 1983, therefore, in our view, learned Industrial Tribunal committed an illegality in passing the award for regularisation of the workman w.e.f. 1st April, 1983. So far as award of Tribunal granting regular pay scale from 1st April, 1983 is concerned, the same appears to be just and reasonable and calls for no interference by this Court, particularly, in view of circular/order of appellant Board itself dated 15th January, 1988. 11. In these circumstances, we allow this special appeal in part and modify the award of the Industrial Tribunal dated 18th November, 1999 and also the order of Single Bench and direct that the respondent/workman will not be treated as regularised w.e.f. 1st April, 1983 but he will be treated as regularised w.e.f. 1st April, 1989 as per recommendation of Screening Committee. However, he will be entitled for regular pay scale w.e.f. 1st April, 1983. 12. Learned counsel for the appellant has prayed for three months' time to make the payment of difference of salary to workman for the period from 1st April, 1983 to 31st March, 1989, if not paid so far. The prayer of the learned counsel for the appellant is allowed. Three months' time, as prayed for, is allowed for making the payment of difference of salary to respondent, if the same has not been paid so far, with the clear understanding that in case, the payment is not made within three months from today, then the said amount will carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of this order. 13. Parties are directed to bear their own costs.Special Appeal allowed in part. *******