JUDGMENT : 1. The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to the 2nd and 3rd respondents to implement the Award dt.27.11.2007 in ID Nos.254/2003, 256/2003, 257/2003, 258/2003, 259/2003, 260/2003, 262/2003, 263/03 and 264/2003 passed by the 1st respondent with all attendant benefits. 2. The grievances of the writ petitioners are that they have filed petitions before the Labour Court for reinstatement, continuity of service and back wages. The Labour Court passed an Award on 27.11.2017, granting reinstatement and continuity of service with 25% back wages. Based on the award, the present writ petition is filed to direct the respondents 2 & 3 to implement the Award. 3. Chapter IV, Section-11 of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947, denotes Procedure, Powers and Duties of Authorities. Section 11(9) states as under: “Every award made, order issued or settlement arrived at by or before Labour Court or Tribunal or National Tribunal shall be executed in accordance with the procedure laid down for execution of orders and decree of a Civil Court under order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.” Section 11(10) states that “The Labour Court or Tribunal or National Tribunal, as the case may be shall transmit any award, order or settlement to a Civil Court, having jurisdiction and such Civil Court shall execute the award, order or settlement as if it were a decree passed by it.” Thus, the institution of execution proceedings are contemplated under the Act itself. When there is a provision for the execution of the Award under the Industrial Disputes Act, this Court need not entertain a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for implementing the award passed by the Labour Court. 4. This Court is of the opinion that when there is an effective remedy provided under the Industrial Disputes Act for the execution of the Award passed by the Labour Court, there is no reason to entertain a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. This being the legal principle to be adopted, the petitioners have to redress their remedy before the appropriate Court of Law, by preferring an Execution Petition as contemplated under the Industrial Disputes Act. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to consider the prayer as such sought for in this writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. 5. This being the legal principle to be adopted, the petitioners have to redress their remedy before the appropriate Court of Law, by preferring an Execution Petition as contemplated under the Industrial Disputes Act. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to consider the prayer as such sought for in this writ petition. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.