Summarize the following court judgment. Appeal No. 254 of 1962. 572 Appeal by special leave from the Award dated May 1	 1961	 of the Industrial Tribunal (111)	 U.P. at Allahabad in Reference No. 69 of 1959. G.S. Pathak	 J. B. Dadachanji	 O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain	 for the appellants. B. P. Maheshwari	 for the respondents. 1962	 August 3 The Judgment of the court was delivered by MUDHOLKAR	 J. The only point for consideration in this appeal by special leave from an award of the Industrial Tribunal at Allahabad is whether the "crushing season" of 1958 59 must be deemed to have ended on March 12	 1959 when the actual crushing of sugar cane stopped or on March 16	 1959 when all ancillary operations in the factory came to an end and the entire machinery was at a standstill. According to the appellants the "crushing season" came to an end on the latter date while according to the respondents who are the employees of the factory it came to an end on the former date. The importance of determining the date on which the season terminated arises out of the admitted position that only those seasonal workers who are borne on the muster roll of the factory on the day next to the date on which the crushing season ended would be entitled to three days ' clos ure holidays. It is the case of the respondents that the appellants employ about 1	600 seasonal workers and about 650 permanent workers. It is common ground that the crushing process terminated on March 12	 1959	 and on that day about 1	000 of the 1	600 seasonal workers left for their homes by the evening after receiving all their dues. The remaining seasonal workers continued to work in the factory till March 16	 1959	 and	 therefore	 under 573 a term of an award of the Industrial Tribunal in reference No. 33 of 53 and dated April 15	 1953	 they are entitled to three days ' closure holidays. The case of the appellants	 however	 is that the crushing season must be regarded as having ended on March 16	 1959 which was the last day on which the factory was worked and that only those seasonal workers who were borne on the muster roll of the factory on March 17	 1959 would be entitled to three days ' closure holidays. The 600 seasonal workers who worked till the evening of March 16	 1959	 would therefore	 according to them not be entitled to closure holidays. During arguments Mr. Pathak also suggested that the fact that between March 12 and March 16	1959	 600 seasonal workers continued to work in the factory has not been established in this case. Taking up the last point it is sufficient to point out that the evidence of W. W. 1	 B. section Chauhan	 who is a member of the executive of the U. P. Trade Union Congress	 Kanpur	 shows that the seasonal workers other than those who left on the evening of March 12	 1959	 were borne on the muster roll of the appellants on March 13	 1959. His evidence on the point has not been challenged in the cross examination. Nor have the appellants examined any witness for the purpose of showing how many seasonal workers were borne on the muster roll on March 13	 1959. The only witness examined by them	 Shri K. K. Sinha	 who is working as Manufacturing Chemist	 has no knowledge about the matter because	 as admitted by him in his cross examination	 he was not working in the mills in the 1958 59 crushing season. Since the total number of seasonal workers was 1	600 and nearly a thousand had left on March 12	 1959 the number of those	 who continued to work till March 16	 1959 must be six hundred. We must	 therefore. proceed on the basis that the names of about 600 574 seasonal workers continued to be borne on the muster roll of the appellants on March 13	 1959. What has to be considered then is what was the date on which the crushing season of 1958 59 ended. It seems to us clear that the crushing season must be deemed ' to have ended on the date on which the crushing operations in the factory came to an end and not on the date on which the manu facturing processes in the factory came to an end. We must give to the expression crushing season" its ordinary meaning	 unless it is shown that in. the industry it has acquired some other meaning There was no evidence before the Tribunal to the effect that crushing season" meant the period during which the factory was actually working and not merely the period during which the crushing operations were being carried on. Clause (3)	 of the Award of 1953 runs as follows:"All permanent workers and such seasonal employees as are on the factory 's roll on the day following the close of the crushing season will be entitled to the clos ure holidays. " There is nothing in the Award to indicate that according to the Tribunal "crushing season" meant anything else than the period during which Crushing operations were carried on. Since	 as already pointed out the operations came to an end on March 12	1959 the crushing season must be held to have ended on that day. Those seasonal workers who were borne on the muster roll on March 13	 1959 would be entitled to	 three days	 closure holidays. Agreeing with the Tribunal we therefore	 uphold the Award and dismiss the appeal with costs. Appeal dismissed.

The appellants employed about 1	600 seasonal workers and about 650 permanent workers. The cane crushing process terminated on March 1	2	 1959	 and on that day about 1	000 of the 1	600 seasonal workers left for their homes by the evening after receiving their dues. The remaining seasonal workers continued to work in the factory till March 16	 1959. Under the term of a previous award	 they were entitled to three days ' closure holidays. According to the Appellant the crushing season must be regarded as having ended on ' March 16	 1959	 which was the last day on which the factory was worked and that only those seasonal workers who were borne on the muster roll of the factory on March 17	 1959	 would be entitled to three days ' closure holidays. The point for consideration was whether the "Crushing season" of 1958 59 must be deemed to have ended on March 12	 1959	 when the actual crushing of sugar cane stopped	 or on March 16	 1959. when all ancillary operations in the factory came to an end and the entire machinery was at a stand still. Held	 that the expression "Crushing Season" must be given its ordinary meaning unless it is shown that in the industry in question it has acquired some other meaning. There was no evidence	 before the tribunal to the effect that "crushing season" meant the period during which the factory was actually working and not merely the period during which the crushing operations were being carried on. Since the operations came to an end on March 12	 1959	 the crushing must be held to have ended on that day	 and	 therefore	 the seasonal workers borne on the muster roll on March 13	 1959	 were entitled to three days ' closure holidays.