( 1 ) THIS application is filed on behalf of respondents 2 to 11 in the writ petition under Section 17b of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947.

( 2 ) THE challenge in the writ Petition is against the award dated 30th September, 1996 of the Industrial Tribunal in I. D. No. 10/88. As per the impugned award the management was directed to reinstate the workmen in service and also to pay to them 50% of back wages from the date of their dismissal from service to the date of the award and full wages from the date of the award to the date of reinstatement in service. While issuing notice on the writ petition and the application for stay (C. M. 997/97) this Court directed that the impugned award shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing. The said stay order was being extended from time to time. Respondent Nos. 2 to 11 in the writ petition are the workmen in whose favour the impugned award was passed. The said workmen have filled the present application for benefits under Section 17b of the Industrial Disputes Act.

( 3 ) THE applicants have stated in the application that they are on the verge of starvation due to prolonged unemployment. It is also stated that they have been unable to get any employment despite their best efforts. Along with the application each of the applicant has filed affidavit stating that since the time of the illegal termination of his service he is unemployed and that he could not get any job despite his best efforts. The affidavits are dated 5th April, 1997. The prayer in the application is to direct the management to pay to the applicants/workmen the last drawn wages inclusive of maintenance allowance as per the provisions of Section 17b of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

( 4 ) THE management/writ petitioner has filed a reply to the application contending that the applicants are not entitled to the benefits under Section 17b of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. According to the averments in the said reply respondent No. 2 Shri Sudershan Kumar is running a business of milk dairy on his own near Mandir in his locality in a temporary shed without any name-plate and is supplying milk in the nearby areas. Respondent No. 4 Shri Deepchand is carrying his business of screen printing at Sector-7, Noida. It is also stated that respondent No. 10, Shri Jagjeevan Mohan is carrying his own business of electrical wiring in houses/residences and that he was found laying electrical wiring at House No. RZ-252, Rajnagar, Part-II, Palam Colony, New Delhi. It is further contended that respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 10 are running their own businesses and are receiving adequate profits and as such they are not entitled to the wages contemplated under Section 17b of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The reply filed by the management is supported by an affidavit of the attorney of the management.

( 5 ) SECTION 17b of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 reads thus: 17-B. Payment of full wages to workman pending proceedings in higher courts-Where in any case a Labour Court, tribunal or National Tribunal by its award directs reinstatement of any workman and the employer prefers any proceedings against such award in a High Court or the Supreme Court, the employer shall be liable to pay such workman, during the period of pendency of such proceedings in the High Court or the Supreme Court, full wages last drawn by him, inclusive of any maintenance allowance admissible to him under any rule if the workman had not been employed in any establishment during such period and an affidavit by such workman had been filed to that effect in such Court: Provided that where it is proved to the satisfaction of the High Court or the Supreme Court that such workman had been employed and had been receiving adequate remuneration during any such period of part thereof, the Court shall order that no wages shall be payable under this section for such period or part, as the case may be.

( 6 ) IN view of the provisions contained in Section 17b