( 1 )

( 2 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 was served as far back as on 5th March, 2001 and despite repeated opportunities, counter affidavit has not been filed by him. Today it is submitted by learned counsel for respondent No. 1 that the said respondent has not contacted the counsel and they have, therefore, no instructions in the matter. Counsel wants notice to be issued to the workman, however, since the workman has already been served at the address given by him before the Industrial Tribunal, I do not deem it necessary to issue any fresh notice to the workman.

( 3 ) THE only dispute between the parties in this case is about the date of regularisation of the workman. The workman was working as a daily wager since about 1980. On 1st April, 1990 his services were regularised. Since the workman had raised a dispute about the date of his regularisation, the matter was referred for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal. By the impugned award, the Industrial Tribunal held him entitled to regularisation of his services w. e. f. 19. 5. 1980 when he was first given work as a daily wager and directed the Management to regularise him with effect from the aforesaid date in proper pay sca