Balakrishnan Nair, J.

This appeal was filed against the order of the learned Single Judge in I.A.No.15603/06 and connected orders in W.P.(C) No.5532 of 2006. The brief facts of the case are the following:

The above writ petition was filed by Sree Sankara University of Sanskrit, challenging Ext.P14 award of the Industrial Tribunal, Aleppey dated 14.11.2005. As per the said award, the Tribunal declared that the termination of the workmen concerned therein was illegal, as the same was done in violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act. It was further declared that, they shall be deemed to be continuing in service and are entitled to get 50% of the back wages. In the writ petition, the union and the workmen filed interlocutory applications, claiming payment of wages, as contemplated under Section 17B of the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as "I.D. Act"). The impugned orders were the orders passed in those applications. Though the applications were allowed by the learned Single Judge, it was ordered that, the last drawn wages as provided under Section 17-B of the I.D.Act need be paid, only from the date of filing of those I.As.. Aggrieved by the said direction, the Writ Appeal is filed.

2. The appellants claim payment of wages under Section 17-B of the I.D. Act, at least, from the date of commencement of the proceedings before this Court, challenging the award. When the matter came up for hearing before the Division Bench, a decision of this Court in Kodungallur Town Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Surendra Babu, 2006 (4) KLT 653 was relied on by the respondents. In the said decision, it was held that the workmen are entitled to get wages under Section 17-B of the I.D. Act, only from the date of filing of the application under the said section. The Division Bench, which heard the appeal, was of the view that the said view taken in the above decision, is unsupportable in the light of the provisions of Section 17-B of the I.D. Act. According to the Division Bench, the workmen were entitled to get wages during the pendency of the proceedings before this Court, provided they are unemployed. In other words, the workmen were entitled to get wages under Section 17-B from the date of institution of the writ petition before this Court. Therefore, doubting the correctness of the decision in Kodungallur Town Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. Surendra Babu, (supra), the matter was referred to the Full Bench.

3. Going by the reference order, the Full Bench is called upon to decide whether the workmen are entitled to get wages under Section 17-B, from the date of institution of the writ petition before this Court or the date they filed the I.A. claiming wages under Section 17-B in the said writ petition. Before proceeding to decide the point referred, we will first refer to the relevant statutory provision. Section 17-B of the I.D. Act reads as follows:

"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 such period or 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.".

This Court rendered the decision in Kodungallur Town Co-operative Ban