ORDER : Heard Mr. Jayant Bajaj, learned counsel for the appellant (Management). Also heard Mr. Parvin Waman Satale, learned counsel for the Trade Union (respondent No.1), representing the interest of the workmen. 2. The present appeal is against the common order dated 13.07.2018 in, inter alia, the Writ Petition (C) No.992/2007 rendered by the learned Judge of the High Court of Bombay. The limited grievance raised by the appellant is towards the direction to deposit a sum of Rs.1,03,20,000/-in the Court by the Management, while the matter is remanded for fresh adjudication by the learned Labour Court at Mumbai. 3. Before the High Court, the parties by agreement asked that the order passed on 29.04.2010 (Annexure P-3) by the First Labour Court at Mumbai, in reference to the Award passed earlier on 18.01.2006, be set aside and the ordered reference under the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 be restored before the Labour Court for fresh consideration, in accordance with law. 4. On the limited grievance, the learned counsel for the appellant refers to the order passed by the High Court on 24.01.2011 (Annexure P-17), to point out that pursuant to the direction given in the said order, the Management had already deposited 50% of the awarded sum in the High Court. The concerned copy of the receipt dated 15.03.2011 (Annexure P-18) is shown by the counsel to contend that when 50% of the award amount is already deposited, the High Court under the impugned order, should not have required the appellant to deposit the further amount as was ordered, in the impugned order dated 13.07.2018. 5. Representing the workmen, Mr. Parvin Waman Satale, learned counsel, submits that this is a long pending matter and only because of the pendency of the present case, although no interim order is passed, the adjudication by the Labour Court is at a standstill despite the remand order passed by the High Court as far back as on 13.07.2018. Therefore there should be a direction for early disposal of the remanded matter by the Labour Court. 6. We have considered the respective submission of the learned counsel for the Management and the workmen. Therefore there should be a direction for early disposal of the remanded matter by the Labour Court. 6. We have considered the respective submission of the learned counsel for the Management and the workmen. Having considered the fact that the Management had earlier deposited 50% of the Award amount i.e. 1,03,20,000/-, before the Bombay High Court on 15.03.2011, when the matter itself is remanded to the Labour Court, to again require the Management to pay the balance 50%, in our assessment is unmerited. The direction given in paragraph (v) of the High Court’s order (dated 13.07.2018) is accordingly set aside and quashed. The Labour Court should decide the reference in accordance with law as was directed by the High Court on 13.07.2018. As it is an old pending matter, effort should be made by the learned Labour Court for early disposal of the remanded matter and decision be rendered preferably within three months from the date of receipt of this order. The Registry shall communicate this order to the concerned Labour Court forthwith. 7. With the above order, the appeals are disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, stand closed.