The central legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of Section 33-C(2) and Section 6H(2) in determining the entitlement of workmen to receive enhanced revised wages as per the Wage Board recommendation and the enforceability of the notifications issued by the State Government.

JUDGMENT

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J. - These are the bunch of six writ petitions, which entails a consideration of common question of fact and law, hence, they are being decided together. To be precise, the particulars involved in each of the writ petitions are being given in the form of a schedule of chart herein below:-

2. Before venturing to answer the argument which had been extended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court feels it to be apt to observe that the petitioners being aggrieved against the judgment of learned Single Judge, which was, rendered on 17.05.2019, as passed in Writ Petition No.134 of 2013, Writ Petition No.145 of 2013, Writ Petition No.155 of 2013 and Writ Petition No.189 of 2013, as having rendered infructuous and simultaneously by disposing of the Writ Petition No.362 of 2017, the appellant/petitioners had preferred the Special Appeal Nos.662 of 2019 and 660 of 2019. The aspect pertaining to dismissing the aforesaid four writ petitions by the aforesaid judgment of Single Judge dated 17.05.2019, as having rendered infructuous, was in the light of the observations, which was made by the learned Single Judge in terms of para 3 and 4 of the judgment, which is extracted hereunder:-

"3. In the writ petitions pertaining to the year 2013 i.e. Writ Petition (M/S) No.134 of 2013, Writ Petition (M/S) No.145 of 2013, Writ Petition (M/S) No.155 of 2013 and Writ Petition (M/S) No.189 of 2013, the order dated 08.09.2012 passed by the State Government under Section 3(b) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 increasing the wages of the workers of the sugar factory has been challenged. No order is being passed in these writ petitions. For all practical purposes these writ petitions have become infructuous. The reason being that during the pendency of these writ petitions, another order dated 29.12.2016 has been passed by the State Government under Section 3(b) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which is also under challenge.

4. Consequently, Writ Petition (M/S) No.134 of 2013, Writ Petition (M/S) No.145 of 2013, Writ Petition (M/S) No.155 of 2013 and Writ Petition (M/S) No.189 of 2013 are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous."

3. Ultimately, on the basis of the finding, which was recorded by the learned Single Judge, the Special Appeal was preferred by the petitioner being Special Appeal No.662 of 2019, which was also dismissed by the Division Bench, by the judgment of 04.01.2021. Hence, as far as the challenge given therein to the decision taken by the Wage Board for revision of the wages payable to the workman to the Order of 08.09.2012 by State U/s 3(a) of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, has been laid to rest qua the petitioners, who were the appellants in the Special Appeals referred above.

4. The brief facts, which now engages consideration in each of the writ petition, are that the petitioner admittedly, is an Industry as defined under Section 2(K) o