ORDER : D.N. Patel, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order delivered by the learned Single Judge dated 29th January, 2014 in I.A. No. 33 of 2014 in W.P. (L) No. 7444 of 2011, whereby, the learned Single Judge has not granted stay upon the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad in Reference No. 64 of 2006 dated 12th August, 2011. 2. It appears that the workman, who was in the services of this appellant, expired on 15th March, 1999. The applicant-son of the deceased-employee whose birth date 15th August, 1987 could not be enlisted in the live roster because he was only 12 years of age as on date of death of his father and as per Clause 9.5.0 of National Coal Wage Agreement-VI, if the legal heir of the deceased employee is above 15 years of age, his name will be kept in the live roster. This aspect of the matter was not properly appreciated by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad while allowing the Reference No. 64 of 2006 and, therefore, such award was challenged by the appellant before this Court in W.P. (L) No. 7444 of 2011. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the writ petition was admitted, but, the I.A. No. 33 of 2014, preferred for getting stay against the award, was rejected and, therefore, present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred mainly on the ground that if the stay is not granted, it will cause irreparable loss to the appellant and there is no prima facie case in favour of the respondent nor balance of convenience is in favour of the respondent and, therefore, after staying the award, let the learned Single Judge decide the writ petition being W.P. (L) No. 7444 of 2011, at the earliest. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that no error has been committed by the learned Single Judge in rejecting I.A. No. 33 of 2014 and, therefore, the appellant should give appointment to the respondent and, thereafter, the matter may be heard by the learned Single Judge. 5. Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the date of birth of legal heir of the deceased employee is 15th August, 1987. The employee expired on 15th March, 1999. 5. Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the date of birth of legal heir of the deceased employee is 15th August, 1987. The employee expired on 15th March, 1999. Thus, as on date of death of his father the age of legal heir of the deceased was about 12 years and, therefore, his name could not be kept in the live roster looking to Clause 9.5.0 of National Coal Wage Agreement-VI. Thus, there is prima facie case in favour of the appellant, balance of convenience is also in favour of the appellant and irreparable loss will be caused to the appellant if the stay of the award passed in Reference No. 64 of 2006 by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1, Dhanbad is not granted. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge. Once the writ petition is admitted meaning thereby to the appellant has a prima facie case against the award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad. We, therefore, stay the operation, implementation and execution of an award passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal No. 1, Dhanbad in Reference No. 64 of 2006, award dated 12th August, 2011 during pendency and final hearing of W.P. (L) No. 7444 of 2011, looking to the prima facie case in favour of the appellant, balance of convenience in favour of the appellant and irreparable loss will be caused to the appellant if the stay is not granted. As the writ petition is pending, we are not much analyzing the fact, but, suffice it to request the learned Single Judge to dispose of W.P. (L) No. 7444 of 2011 at the earliest, preferably within a period of six months on its own merit, in accordance with law and without being influenced by the order passed by this Court in this Letters Patent Appeal. 6. This Letters Patent Appeal is, hereby, allowed and disposed of with the aforesaid request to the learned Single Judge. 7. Accordingly, I.A. No. 2774 of 2015 is disposed of, in view of final disposal of the Letters Patent Appeal.