K.M. Thaker, J.

Heard Mr. Raval, learned advocate for petitioner and learned advocate for respondent.

2. The award dated 10.7.2015 passed by learned Industrial Tribunal at Rajkot in Reference No.197 of 2006 is challenged in present petition.

2.1 By impugned award the learned Tribunal directed present petitioner to treat the period from 31.5.2004 (when the petitioner relieved present respondent from service on the ground that he attained age of superannuation) to 30.09.2007 as notional so far as payment of actual benefits (salary etc.) is concerned, however, to take into account the said period (i.e. from 31.5.2004 to 30.09.2007)as period "in service" rendered by the respondent and to calculate retiral benefits by taking into account revision in salary etc., and to pay retiral benefits accordingly without payment of arrears of salary and other benefits during the said period.

3. So far as factual backdrop is concerned, it has emerged from the record and from rival submissions by learned advocate for the contesting parties that the petitioner appointed present respondent as driver, in 1968. At the time when the respondent came to be appointed the employer (present petitioner) ent