:1: IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.713 OF 2007 Indian Airlines Karmachari Sangh. ..Petitioner. Vs. Indian Airlines Ltd. and ors. ..Respondents. Mr.S.N.Dharap with Ms. Anjali Helekar for the Petitioner. Mr.P. Ramaswami with Mr. Lanch D’souza and Mr. V.M.Parkar for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr.Ravi Shetty with Ms. H.P.Shah for the Respondent Nos.3 to 5. CORAM: F.I.REBELLO & R.S.MOHITE, JJ. DATED :28TH JANUARY,2008. PC : 1. The petitioner herein had raised industrial dispute which was referred by the appropriate Government authority to the Industrial Tribunal. By award dated 1.2.2006 the Tribunal directed as under. "Keeping in mind, the entire evidence on record the discussions made above, I conclude all the three issues framed in this reference in favour of the workmen to the extent that all the workmen under reference are entitled to be considered for regular work subject to their suitability leaving aside the criteria of age bar and that they shall be absorbed on a permanent basis as and when opportunity arises on the availability of the vacancies in the :2: permanent cadre.The workmen are not entitled to any other relief at this juncture. The compliance of the order be made by the company within a period of four months from today positively. . It is therefore, clear that as per the above directions the respondents herein were to absorb the workmen under subject matter of reference on permanent basis as and when opportunity arises on the availability of the vacancies in the permanent cadre. 2. By the present petition, the petitioner has sought relief of Writ of mandamus to direct the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to forthwith implement the award dated 1.2.2006 published in Government Gazette dated 11.3.2006 at Exhibit-A attached to this petition and further sought direction that the order directing the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 to immediately take necessary steps as provided under Section-29 of the Industrial Dispute Act,1947. 3. We have issued notice to the respondent in order to resolve the controversy considering the fact that the workmen under reference have put in several years of service as casual labourers with the respondents. Various replies have been filed on behalf of the respondents, Rejoinders have also been filed on behalf of the petitioner herein. :3: 4. From the material placed on record, it is not possible to record any finding of fact that there are regular vacancies and to direct the respondents herein to absorb the workmen. 5. On behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 however, reply has been filed that in so far as workmen who were the subject matter of reference will be given first preference against the jobs available and further if they report for work they will be given full day work in both the shifts. . The question is considering the award and the material on record and the reliefs prayed for whether it is open to this court to grant any relief in terms as prayed for. . Ordinarily, in case there being any breach of the award to implement the award, there is mechanism provided by the Industrial Disputes Act,1947 itself. In these circumstances, it is not desirable to exercise the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this court. Considering the relevant award and the reliefs sought for, it is not possible to grant reliefs as prayed for. The statement made by the respondents-management that they would give first preference to the employees and giving them work in both the shifts is accepted, till such time the award :4: is implemented. With the above observations, petition is rejected. 6. It is made clear that disposal of this petition will not prevent the petitioner from taking recourse under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)