(Mrs. Mridula Bhatkar, J.)

1. These LPAs are directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge dated 26.10.2010 in Writ Petition No. 3139/2010 granting wages under Section 17-B of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The respondent-company is manufacturer of pharmaceutical products and the appellant was a workman. He was asked to prepare a Batch Manufacturing Record (BMR) but he refused to perform accordingly and instigated other workmen, therefore, chargesheet was issued against him on 23.11.2007. In the inquiry he was held guilty and was dismissed from the service by order dated 9.6.2008. The workman challenged the said order by filing Reference before the Labour Court. In the said Reference, an application filed for interim award (Exh.E) was contested by the company and the Presiding Officer Dadra & Nagar Haveli at Silvasa, vide order dated 20th February, 2010, has partly allowed the said application, and directed to provisionally re-instate the workman on his initial post from the date of his termination and the employer was directed to pay 75% of total gross wages with effect from the date of re-joining the services till the disposal of the case. The said order was challenged by the company in Writ Petition No.3139 of 2010. According to the Management, as the Reference was pending, the order of the Presiding officer of the Labour Court cannot be considered to be an award as defined under Section 2(b) of the Act. The said Writ Petition has been admitted on 28th June, 2010 and the operation of the impugned order of the Tribunal dated 20th February, 2010 has been stayed. Consequent thereto the worker filed Civil Application No. 22299/2010 in the pending Writ Petition to direct the Management to pay wages in terms of Section 17-B of the Act. The said application was resisted by the Management amongst other on the ground that the order passed by the Tribunal dated 20th February,2010 was not an award. As a result provisions of section 17-B of the Act cannot be invoked. The learned single Judge, however, has rejected the said objection and has ordered that the wages under Section 17-B of the Act be paid to the worker from the date of the application within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order.

2. Both, i.e employer and the workman, are aggrieved by the said order dated 26th October,2010, passed by the learned single Judge and have filed separate Letters Patent Appeals before this Court. Employer-Company is aggrieved by the view taken by the learned Single Judge that the order passed by the Tribunal dated 20th February,2010 is in the nature of an interim award. Whereas, the workman in the cross appeal contends that the wages under Section 17-B of the Act ought to have been from the date of the impugned award or at least from the date of filing original petition.

3. In the present matter,the core issue involved is as under:-

“Whether the order passed by the Labour Court is only an interim relief or an interim award within the meaning of Section 2(b) of the Act, 1947 and if it is an interim award, whether the workman is entitled for wages under Section 17-B of the Act from the date of the said interim award ?

4. The workman wassuspended on 23/11/2007. He was asked to fill the average weight, 20 tablets of Lisinopril in B.M.R. in compression area. According to the Company as per Current Good Manufacturing Practice (CGMP) norms B.M.R. filling is mandatory process. He refused to do so and instigated and provoked other workmen not to do so. He is also habitual late on duty. Thus, as per the authority he has committed willful insubordination, incited others to strike the work and threatened co-workmen and superiors. Therefore, chargesheet was issued for misconduct. The administration of Dadra and Nagar Haveli (U.T.) made reference by its order dated 16/9/2000. Krantikari Kamgar Union urged the administration of Dadra and Nagar Haveli (U.T.) to intervene into the