HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 2923 of 2001 (M/S) (Old No. 892/98) 1. U.P. Jal Nigam Lucknow through its Chairman 2. The Executive Engineer, Construction Division, U.P. Jal Nigam, Roorkee, District Haridwar ...... Petitioner Versus 1. The Deputy Labour Commissioner, U.P. Meerut Region, Meerut. 2. Sri Nakli Ram son of Sri Dilla Ram resident of village and Post Khushalpur Kalan, District Saharanpur ......... Respondents Sri Sudhir Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Sri Pankaj Miglani, Advocate for the respondent no.2. Dated: 18.7.2006. Hon’ble Rajesh Tandon, J. Heard Sri Sudhir Singh counsel for the petitioners and Sri Mangaj Miglani counsel for respondent no. 2. By the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the recovery certificated dated 3.7.1990. Briefly stated the State of U.P. referred a disputed to the Labour Court under Section 4-k of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. The question for determination was that whether the employeer has illegally terminated the service of the respondent no. 2 w.e.f. 1.7.1997. The parties have filed written statements and ultimately order was passed on 3.7.1990, directing 2 reinstatement of respondent no. 2 with full back wages. Aggrieved by the award of the Labour Court, petitioners have filed a writ petition before this Court which was dismissed on 20.10.1999. After dismissal of the writ petition, respondent no. 2 initiated proceedings under section 6-H of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, for implementation of he award. Application under section 6-H of the Act was allowed directing the petitioners to pay the amount to the extent of Rs.34,509/-. The grievance of the petitioners is that although the amount was payable in pursuance of the award as well as the order of the High Court, but the amount has not been properly computed. Looking into the grievance of the petitioners, the amount of the award be paid to the respondent no. 2, along with the interest after proper calculation within one month after obtaining certified copy of this order. Subject to the observation made above, writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Dated: 18.7.2006 Rajesh Tandon, J. *Dhyani