- (1.)These three appeals arise out of an industrial dispute between the appellants, the Management of Motipur Zamindari and another and their workmen. Six points of dispute were referred to the Industrial Tribunal for its adjudication. After hearing the parties the Tribunal made its award. Aggrieved by the said award both the employers and the workmen have come to this Court by special leave. Appeals Nos. 110 and 112 of 1964 are preferred by the employers whereas Appeal No. 111 of 1964 has been preferred by the workmen.
(2.)The points in dispute between the parties were these:
"1. Whether the workmen be allowed weekly rest day leave and holidays If so, what should be the amount and the procedure for granting the same

2. After what period and under what conditions a workman be made permanent

3. What should be the wage of each of the categories of workmen Whether a time scale of wages with provision for annual increment be provided for the workmen What should be the rate of payment to the loading mazdoors for loading cane and such other purposes

4. Whether a scheme of Provident fund and retirement gratuity should be introduced If so, what should be the scheme

5. Whether Sarvashri Anchit Roy and Raghunandan Singh, two watchmen be reinstated or/and otherwise compensated

6. Whether normal workload be fixed for each individual and group of workmen for different kinds of work If so, what should be the work-load -

(3.)The learned Additional Solicitor-General has fairly not pressed his appeals in respect of Issues 1, 4 and 5. He wanted to argue the question about the fixation of wage which was covered by Point 3 and he stated to us that the workmen also challenged the fixation of wage from their point of view. We then intimated to the learned counsel appearing for both the parties that that was a matter of fact and we did not propose to interfere with the conclusion of the Tribunal on that point. So Issue 3 also does not remain to be considered in the employers' appeals.