Writ Petition No.4064 of 2005 (s) 13.12.2011 :- Ms. Mini Ravindran, learned Dy. Govt. Advocate for the appellant/State. None for the respondents. Heard. By filing this petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.04.2005 passed by Member Judge, Industrial Court in Appeal No.533/MPIR/2001 affirming the order dated 23.08.2001 passed by Labour Court in case No.127/MPIR/89. Briefly stated one Gurmeet Singh (since dead) was working in the Public Works Department of the petitioner. His case before the Labour Court was that though he was working as Electrician he was not being classified as Electrician and was not being paid the salary of Electrician. The Labour Court after recording the evidence held that he was appointed as Wireman-I but was performing the work of Electrician. The Labour Court, therefore, ordered for his classification on the post of Wireman Class-I denying his prayer for classification on the post of Electrician. However, the Labour Court having recorded the finding that the employee had actually worked on the higher post of Electrician ordered for payment of difference of salary to his LR's since the employee had expired during the pendency of the case before the Labour Court. For granting the monetary benefits the Labour Court relied upon the law laid down by a Full Bench of this Court in the case of Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation and another Vs. Narain Singh Rathore and others (1994 MPLJ 959). The said finding that the employee had worked on higher post has been affirmed by the Industrial Court on re-appreciation of evidence. It held that the deceased employee though was appointed as Wireman-I but was performing the work of Electrician a higher post. In the circumstances, the Industrial Court declined interference in the direction issued by the Labour Court for grant of difference of salary to the LR's of deceased employee. This finding of fact in our considered view is based upon sound appreciation of evidence and need no interference in this petition, which is essentially a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed. [Shantanu Kemkar] [ Prakash Shrivastava] Judge Judge AM.