COURT NO.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) 632/2001 (Old No. 18525/1990) U.P. State Electricity Board & Other …….Petitioners Versus Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bareilly And Others. …….Respondents Sri H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners. None for the respondent no. 2 to 4. 30th July, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. The validity and legality of the award dated 26.10.1989 passed by the Labour Court under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has been challenged in this writ petition. The following dispute was referred by the State Government to the Labour Court for its adjudication: Whether the action of the employer in pay fixation of its workmen Devi Dutt Pathak, S.S.O. and Pratap Singh Bisht S/o Sri Chatur Singh Bisht, S.S.O. with effect from 1.4.1987 is correct? If not, what pay should be fixed in respect of the concerned workmen? 2. Relevant facts of the case are that the concerned workmen were initially appointed on 1.9.1953 at Electricity Supply Centre of Nagar Palika, Haldwani. Subsequently, the said Electricity Supply Centre was 2 taken over by the U.P. State Electricity Board w.e.f. 1.1.1976. Consequently, services of these workmen came under the U.P. State Electricity Board. Thereafter Electricity Board revised the pay scales of its employees with retrospective effect from 1.4.1969. Workmen were given the benefit of revised wages w.e.f. 1.1.1976. Workmen alleged that they were also entitled to receive the revised wages w.e.f. 1.4.1969 and accordingly claimed pay fixation w.e.f. 1.1.1976. 3. After considering the evidence adduced on record, the Labour Court answered the aforesaid reference in affirmative in favour of the workmen and against the petitioners. Hence, this petition. 4. A perusal of the impugned award reveals that the Labour Court has considered the factual position in great detail and held that the concerned workmen are entitled to get the revised pay scale w.e.f. 1.4.1969 and their pay should be fixed accordingly. 5. Findings recorded by the Labour Court are findings of fact and hence I cannot interfere with the impugned award in writ jurisdiction. Resultantly, writ petition being devoid of merit is dismissed. No order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 30.7.2008 Prabodh