(1.) The twenty-four employees involved in the present industrial dispute are, variously peons, gardeners and sweepers, working at the head office of the appellant-mills. Out of them, fifteen workmen had earlier raised an industrial dispute demanding wages and dearness allowance as was paid to the workmen in the factory of the mills. By an award dated 30/10/1982, the Industrial tribunal granted the wages and dearness allowance to them on par with those payable to the workmen in the factory. The appellant-mills thereafter extended the same wages and dearness allowance as awarded by the tribunal to the rest of the present twenty-four workmen.
(2.) It appears that misinterpreting the award in question, the appellant-mills also extended the other service conditions as were applicable to the workmen in the factory to the present employees and withdrew the corresponding other service conditions which they were enjoying prior to the award of 1982. Aggrieved by the withdrawal of the said other service conditions, the workmen raised the present industrial dispute claiming that the mills had committed an illegal change within the meaning of Section 4-1 of the U. P. Industrial Disputesact, 1947 ('the Act'). The State government made a reference of the said dispute to the Industrial tribunal in the following terms:
(3.) The tribunal found that the benefits which the employees were getting prior to the award of 1982 were more advantageous and since they were withdrawn, there was an illegal change within the meaning of Section 4-1 of the Act, and struck down the said change in the service conditions. The High court in writ petition confirmed the award of the tribunal. Hence the present appeal.