1. 1. We do not find any error in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. It is not in dispute that the respondent-workman was appointed on 1.10.1983 on daily wages. His services were terminated after a long period of about 10 years without complying with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act. In spite of this, the Labour Court merely awarded compensation of Rs. 25,000/- to the workman without granting him relief of reinstatement with consequential benefits. The learned Single Judge relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court In Vikramaditya Pandey v. Industrial Tribunal, Lucknow & Anr 2001 2 SCC 423 . held that the Labour Court was not right in denying the relief of reinstatement to the respondent-workman with "some back wages". Accordingly, the learned Single Judge modified the award of the Labour Court and by directing the appellant to reinstate the respondent-workman in service with effect from the date of termination of his service along with 25% of the back wages instead of payment of Rs. 25,000/-awarded by the Labour Court. The order passed by the learned Single Judge is imminently just and fair and no interference is called for. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.Special Appeal Dismissed.

*******