- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The order under challenge, reads thus: "There is a serious dispute between the parties as to whether the workman has completed '240 days of service. The Labour Court has recorded a finding in favour of the management holding that he worked only for 235 days. The petitioner has, produced a copy of the attendance register which is said to have been produced by the management during the course of conciliation proceedings. A. perusal of this document shows, that the workman had worked for; 29 days; during the month of March 1993 whereas the Labour Court has counted only 24 days for this month; Without going into the merits of the dispute raised before us, we are of the view that it would be in the interest of justice to modify the impugned award and direct the respondent management to pay to the petitioner a sum of Rs 10,0,00 in all, "towards full and final settlement of his claim as made before the Labour Court. Order accordingly. Let the amount be paid to the workman within "one month from the date pf receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. "
(3.) We find it difficult to appreciate how the High Court in the order under challenge could have modified the award that was impugned before it and directed payment, m full and-final settlement of the workman's claim made before the-Labour Court "without going into the meats of the dispute Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 1893 of 2000.;