JUDGMENT : K.S. Jhaveri, J. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of learned Single Judge whereby learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition confirming the order of Industrial Tribunal, Ajmer. 2. The Labour Court in case No. LCR125/99 vide judgment dated 20.08.2002 has passed the following order:- ^^1 & izkFkhZ dh ekSf[kd lsok eqfDr fnukad 05-04-1995 /kkjk 25 ,Q dk mYya?ku djus ds dkj.k voS/k o izHkko'kwU; djkj nh tkrh gSA 2 & vkS|ksfxd fookn vf/k0 1958 ds fu;e 77 lifBr /kkjk 25 th dh vogsyuk Hkh lkQ rkSj ij ifjyf{kr gksus ds lsokeqfDr voS/k BgjkbZ tkrh gSA 3 & izkFkhZ dh lsok eqfDr dh fnuakd 05-04-1995 ls gh :0 1100@& izfrekg ds fQDlM osru ij cgky fd;k tkdj U;kf;d fl)kUr leku dk;Z ds fy;s leku osru ds vk/kkj ij fnuakd 15-04-1995 ls izkFkhZ dks dfu"B fyfid ds in ij vLFkkbZ :i ls fu;fer osru J`a[kyk 950&1680 e; leLr ns; Hkrksa ds U;wure osru dk ykHk fnyk;s tkus dk Hkh vkns'k fn;k tkrk gSA 4 & izkFkhZ dks fu;fer osru J`a[kyk esa jsX;wyjkbZt fd;s tkus dk vf/kdkj dsoy rHkh izkIr gksxk tcfd og dydZ&de&VkbZfiax VsLV esa gksus okyh fdlh Hkkoh ijh{kk dks mrh.kZ dj eSfjV esa LFkku izkIr dj ysosA 5 & izkFkhZ dh lsok eqfDr ,oa okLrfod lsok cgkyh dh frfFk ds chp dh vof/k dk tks cdk;k osru curk gks ml ij og vkB izfr'kr okf"kZd nj ls C;kt Hkh izkIr djus dk vf/kdkjh gksxkA** 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the term of reference which has been raised reads as under:- ^^D;k futks;d jftLV~kj] egf"kZ n;kuan ljLorh fo'ofo|ky; vtesj }kjk Jfed Jh jktdqekj tSu iq= Jh 'kadjyky tSu] fuoklh 4 ts ih uxj] lsDVj 3] fu;j ikoj gkml] enkj ukdk] vtesj dh lsokeqfDr voS/k gS\ ;fn ugha rks Jfed fdl jkgr dks ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS\** 4. Therefore, he has contended that the Labour court has seriously committed an error travelling beyond the scope of reference. Learned Single Judge has not considered the same and the order of pay scale is already granted pursuant to the order dated 22.12.2015. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Amarkant Rai v. State of Bihar & Ors. In 2015 (2) SCT 441. 5. Learned Single Judge has not considered the same and the order of pay scale is already granted pursuant to the order dated 22.12.2015. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Amarkant Rai v. State of Bihar & Ors. In 2015 (2) SCT 441. 5. In that view of the matter, the limited controversy which is raised by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Labour court has travelled beyond the scope of reference is required to be clarified. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents has supported the orders of the learned Single Judge as well as the Labour Court and submitted that both the orders are just and proper. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 8. The contention raised by the counsel for the appellant required to be accepted as the reference was only for the termination and the relieving order. 9. The appeal is allowed and the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge is quashed and set aside. However, it is made clear that the appellant was entitled to the minimum pay scale after reinstatement which finding will not be disturbed.