ORDER :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

1. By way of instant petition filed under Art. 226/227 of the Constitution of India, challenge has been laid to Award dated 5.5.2017, passed by learned Presiding Judge, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court in Ref. No. 86 of 2005, whereby learned Tribunal below, while allowing the claim petition of the respondent Nos. 2 to 13/workmen (hereinafter, 'workmen'), directed the petitioner-employer (hereinafter, 'employer') to pay full wages, alongwith all consequential benefits to the workmen, with effect from the date they were given retirement by employer on completion of age of 55 years till they attained the age of 60 years, within a period of three months from the date of passing of award till realization failing which, the same shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of petition till realization.

2. For having bird's eye view of the matter, certain undisputed facts as emerge from the pleadings as well as documents available on record, are that workmen No. 2, 3, 12 and 13 and predecessor-in-interest of respondents Nos. 4 to 7 and 8 to 11 (hereinafter, 'workmen') were employed with the petitioner company and they joined services of petitioner during 1978-79. On attaining age of 55 years, the workmen were retired from the service of the petitioner during the year 1998 to 2002, as detailed in para-4 of the writ petition. First Standing Order of the petitioner company came into force with effect from 5.4.1982 which was certified by the Certifying Officer under the provisions of S. 5 of Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946. Under Clause 25 of the Standing Order, date of retirement/superannuation of workman was fixed at 55 years as is evident from Clause 25 of the work Certified Standing Order (Annexure P-3). Clause 25 of annexure P-3 provides as under:

"25. Superannuation/retirement:-

The employee shall automatically retire from the service of the company on attaining age of 55 years in accordance with the date of birth given by him at the time of appointment and as appearing in the Company's records.

The management may at the discretion extend the service of an employee for a period not exceeding one year at a time subject to maxim of 3 years."

3. On 18.7.1998, workmen working with the petitioner-company, including present workmen, applied to the Certifying Officer for changing age of retirement of workmen by modifying the Standing Order from 55 to 60 years. Certifying Officer, approved the modification sought by worker's union on 17.11.1998 and communicated the same to petitioner company vide letter dated 19.11.1998 (Annexure P-4).

4. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid order dated 17.11.2018 passed by the Certifying Officer modifying the age of retirement from 55 to 60 years, in the Standing Orders, petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate authority on 13.12.1998 however, such appeal was dismissed on 10.1.2003, as is evident from Annexure P-5. Petitioner Company preferred CWP No. 263 of 2003 before this court assailing therein order dated 10.1.2003 passed by appellate authority. Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 23.5.2005, disposed of the petition permitting the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach the Certifying Officer for certification of draft Standing Order including items relating to age of retirement of employees/workmen. While granting aforesaid liberty to the petitioner company, Division Bench of this court set aside order dated 19.11.1998 passed by Certifying Officer as well as order dated 10.1.2003 passed by the appellate authority with respect to modification effected in Standing Order of the company. Copy of the said order stands annexed as Annexure P-6. Petitioner company in light of aforesaid liberty granted to it by Division Bench of this Court, submitted a draft proposal on 18.6.2005 for modification of Standing Order, to the Certifying Officer and proposed following modification with respect to age of re