JUDGMENT : K.M. Thaker, J. 1. Heard Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned senior counsel with Ms. Vidhi Bhatt, learned advocate for the claimants - petitioners and Mr. K.M. Patel, learned senior counsel with Mr. V.K. Patel, learned advocate for the opponent - employer. 2. In this group of petitions, Special Civil Application No. 24517 of 2007 to Special Civil Application No. 24522 of 2007 and Special Civil Application No. 23660 of 2007 are filed by the claimants before the learned Labour Court, whereas Special Civil Application No. 6824 of 2008 to Special Civil Application No. 6828 of 2008 are filed by the opponent employer before the learned Labour Court. 3. In the captioned petitions, same award dated 23.5.2007 passed by the learned Labour Court at Ahmedabad in Reference (LCA) No. 1364 of 1997 is challenged by the claimants - workmen before the learned Labour Court as well as by the opponent - employer. 4. Individual claimants have filed separate petitions and the original opponent (employer) has also filed petitions and challenged the directions passed by the learned Labour Court in respect of 7 claimants - workmen were before the learned Labour Court. 5. The claimants before the learned Labour Court had raised an industrial dispute on the allegation that their services were illegally terminated by the employer. The appropriate Government referred the said dispute for adjudication to the learned Labour Court vide order of reference dated 17.11.1997. The said order of reference culminated into Reference (LCA) No. 1364 of 1997, wherein after adjudication the learned Labour Court passed an award which is impugned in this group of petitions. 6. By the award impugned in this group of petitions, the learned Labour Court has declared that the services of the claimants were terminated by way of retrenchment and that the retrenchment of the claimants from service with effect from 2.8.1997 was in violation of statutory provisions. 7. Having regard to the fact that during the pendency of the proceedings before learned Labour Court one of the claimants (Mr. G.M. Shukla) had reached age prescribed for superannuation, the learned Labour Court directed the opponent - employer to pay 20% backwages from the date of termination upto the date on which said Mr. Shukla reached age of superannuation. 8. Further, so far as 2 claimants, out of 7 claimants namely, Mr. Girish Gadake and Mr. G.M. Shukla) had reached age prescribed for superannuation, the learned Labour Court directed the opponent - employer to pay 20% backwages from the date of termination upto the date on which said Mr. Shukla reached age of superannuation. 8. Further, so far as 2 claimants, out of 7 claimants namely, Mr. Girish Gadake and Mr. Ramfer Baurasi, the learned Labour Court did not grant backwages and instead, directed the opponent - employer to reinstate the said 2 workmen with continuity of service but without backwages. 9. So far as other 4 claimants are concerned namely, Mr. Devang Dave, Mr. Bipin R. Dhruv, Mr. Jitendra Bhavsar and Mr. Jeram Kardoz, the learned Labour Court directed the opponent - employer to reinstate the said 4 claimants in service and 20% backwages. Thus, the Court has granted reinstated in respect of 6 workmen whereas backwages are allowed in respect of 5 workmen. Below quoted tabular summary of relevant facts give broad and general idea of relevant facts and explaining the directions: Sr. No. Name of the Employee SCA No. (Filed by the Employer) SCA No. (Filed by the Employee) Award of the Labour Court Date of Retirement 1 Devang Dave 6824/08 24517/07 Reinstatement with 20% backwages 28/7/18 2 Jeram Kardoz 6825/08 24519/07 Reinstatement with 20% backwages 26/8/20 3 Bipin R. Dhruv 6826/08 24520/07 Reinstatement with 20% backwages 20/3/14 4 Ghanshyam Shukla 6827/08 23660/07 No Reinstatement only 20% backwages till the date of retirement 12/07/03 5 Jitendra Bhavsar 6828/08 24518/07 Reinstatement with 20% backwages 10/01/13 6 Girish Gadake NA 24521/07 Reinstatement without backwages Expired 7 Ramfer Baurasi NA 24522/07 Reinstatement without backwages 01/07/15 10. 5 claimants, out of total 7 claimants, have filed petitions and challenged that part of the award/direction which denies balance 80% backwages. Thus, the challenge by 5 claimants is restricted to denial of balance backwages to the extent of 80%. The claimants' demand that the award of the learned Labour Court to the extent it denies 80% backwages, may be set aside and the employer may be directed to pay full backwages and the direction to reinstate the workmen may be confirmed. 11. Whereas the original opponent - employer has challenged the award so far as the direction to pay backwages @ 20% to 5 workmen. The employer claims that the direction as to backwages may be set aside. 12. 11. Whereas the original opponent - employer has challenged the award so far as the direction to pay backwages @ 20% to 5 workmen. The employer claims that the direction as to backwages may be set aside. 12. Before proceeding further, it is necessary to mention, at the outset, that after both the sides argued the petitions at considerable length, both sides realised, having regards to the facts and circumstances, the age of the claimants, the period which has already passed in prosecuting the reference cases and these petitions and also the fact that at earlier stage they have already undergone one round of litigation pursuant to which the employer removed the defects which infected its previous action (viz. retrenching the workmen) and the employer again retrenched the claimants on or about 24.3.2008 the claimants and the employer entered into process of deliberations and negotiations for full and final settlement of entire dispute and all claims. 13. Now the Court is informed that after prolonged deliberations, an amicable settlement is arrived at. 14. After taking specific instructions and consent from each of the claimants/petitioners, Mr. Mehta, learned senior counsel for the claimants stipulated and declared that in lieu of all claims, disputes, demands and rights including those flowing from the award, the claimants have agreed to accept backwages @ 50% (as against 20% awarded by the learned Labour Court) and in turn to forgo the claim or right/benefit of reinstatement in all those cases where the learned Labour Court has awarded reinstatement with 20% backwages and in other 2 cases where the Court has not awarded backwages and granted only reinstatement the employer has agreed to pay backwages @ 30% instead of reinstatement and the said claimants shall forgo claim/right and benefit of reinstatement granted by the learned Court. 15. Mr. Mehta, learned senior counsel for the claimants also submitted and declared that the claimants/petitioners also undertake and assure that on payment/receipt of 50% backwages or 30% backwages the claimants/petitioners shall not claim reinstatement and the claimants shall not initiate any other/fresh litigation or proceedings against the opponent - employer in any form or before any Court or Tribunal or Forum and 50% backwages or 30% backwages will be accepted by the claimants/petitioners in final settlement of all claims. He has further stated on instruction that the workmen, who were retrenched on or about 24.3.2008 after reinstatement pursuant to impugned award, have not raised any dispute or demand against the second order of retrenchment passed in 2008 and the workmen have agreed that no such dispute against the orders of retrenchment made in March 2008 will be raised by the workmen. 16. Mr. Mehta, learned senior counsel also stipulated and declared that the claimants/petitioners shall also not demand wages for the period from the date of award until 23.3.2016. 17. Mr. Patel, learned senior counsel for the opponent - employer submitted and declared that the opponent - employer has to pay backwages @ 50% to the claimants in whose favour Court granted reinstatement and 20% backwages whereas in cases where the Court has awarded only reinstatement and not granted backwages the employer has agreed to pay 30% backwages. 18. Learned senior counsel for the claimants and the employer have jointly submitted and requested that the impugned award may be modified with consent of parties in terms of the agreement so as to give effect to the terms of settlement between the parties. 19. Mr. Patel, learned senior counsel for the opponent - employer also requested that time until 31.9.2016 may be granted for completing payment of 50% backwages to the claimants. He submitted that the opponent - employer will pay amount in installments spread over from 23.3.2016 to 31.9.2016. 20. Learned senior counsel for both the parties have, with the consent of their respective clients and at their instructions, jointly submitted that the award may be modified in terms of the agreement. 21. In this view of the matter and in light of the said submissions and request by learned senior counsel for the parties, it is not necessary to examine rival contentions on merits or to decide the challenge and objection raised by the contesting parties on merits and/or to examine the award on merits and/or to record detailed reasons and final conclusions. Therefore, the petitions are finally disposed of in view of the joint request by learned senior counsel for the parties and in terms of the agreement arrived at between the parties. In light of the agreement between the parties and in light of joint submissions, following order is passed: "(a) The employer shall pay 50% backwages to Mr. D.R. Dave, Mr. J.N. Kardoz, Mr. In light of the agreement between the parties and in light of joint submissions, following order is passed: "(a) The employer shall pay 50% backwages to Mr. D.R. Dave, Mr. J.N. Kardoz, Mr. B.R. Dhruve, Mr. J.V. Bhavsar from the date of retrenchment until 23.5.2007 i.e. the date of the award and it shall also pay 50% backwages to Mr. G.M. Shukla from the date of termination but until the date on which the said claimant reached age of superannuation (i.e. 12.7.2003); (b) The claimants/petitioners shall not claim wages for the period from 23.5.2007 to 23.3.2016; (c) The petitioners shall pay first installment on or before 15.5.2016 of 15% backwages and shall pay further 15% backwages by 31.7.2016 and it shall pay further 10% backwages by 31.8.2016 and balance 10% backwages by 30.9.2016; (d) The said amount shall be paid by way of demand draft drawn in the name of the concerned claimants and the amount shall be forwarded to the concerned claimants directly at the addresses of the claimants, details whereof have been supplied to learned advocate for the employer; (e) The direction granting reinstatement shall not survive in terms of the agreement between the parties and in light of this order; (f) The petitioners shall also pay backwages at 30% and at the same time to the other two claimants namely, Mr. Ramfer Baurasi (since deceased) and Mr. G.G. Gadake (since deceased) also, though the learned Labour Court has awarded only reinstatement but denied backwages. The same shall be paid by four equal installments of 7.5% as per the time frame provided in paragraph No. 21(c); (g) As agreed on behalf of workmen, no dispute will be raised or claim will be made against the order of retrenchment by employer on or about 24.2.2008 after reinstatement pursuant to the impugned award and on payment of backwages as per present order, they will have no further claim against the employer." This order is passed with consent of the claimants and the employer and at the joint request of the parties. With the aforesaid clarifications and directions, the petitions are partly allowed. The award impugned in present petitions is modified in terms of the agreement between the parties. The agreement between the parties is arrived at by way of full and final settlement between the parties. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.