- (1.) The present appeal has been preferred against an order, passed by the learned Single Judge dated 8th October, 2010 in W.P.(L) No. 4912 of 2009.
(2.) The writ petition was preferred by the Management of Hyderabad Industries (Respondent No. 1 in the present Letters Patent Appeal), whereby, the award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Ranchi, in Reference No. 1 of 2006 dated 18th April, 2009 was challenged, especially to the effect that Demand No. 1 and Demand No. 13, which were allowed by the Tribunal, deserve to be quashed and set aside. The said writ petition was allowed by the learned single Judge and the matter was remanded to the Industrial Tribunal, Ranchi, for afresh decision and, therefore, the workmen have preferred this Letters Patent Appeal.
(3.) We have heard learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant at length, who has submitted that the appeal is restricted only for Demand No. 1, which is with regard to "equal pay for equal work" and the Industrial Tribunal has rightly allowed Demand No. 1. The Management has two units; one at Sanat Nagar (Hyderabad) whereas the another is situated at Jasidih within the State of Jharkhand and, therefore, the workmen, who are performing the same work at Sanat Nagar Unit (Hyderabad) and who are working at Jasidih Unit (Jharkhand) must be paid equal pay, for their equal work. This aspect of the matter was correctly appreciated by the learned Industrial Tribunal, whereas, the learned single Judge for no justifiable reasons quashed the said finding and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for a decision afresh and, therefore, the order passed by the learned single Judge deserves to be quashed and set aside.;