JUDGMENT
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.
1. This writ petition pertains to the fallout of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors., . The petitioner’s union represents the employees of the erstwhile Hamdard Factory at Lal Kuan, Delhi. The said factory belonging to Hamdard Dawakhana (Wakf) Laboratories represented by the respondent nos. 4 & 5 herein which was at Lal Kuan, Delhi, had to be shut down in view of the said decision of the Supreme Court being an industry falling in the ‘H’ category. The factory was relocated to their own premises at Ghaziabad (U.P.). It is not in dispute that the said factory has been shifted from Lal Kuan, Delhi to Ghaziabad (U.P.) as indicated in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent No. 4 & 5.
2. The entire issue in the present petition is with regard to the entitlement for “shifting bonus” to be given to the workmen who agree to shift with the industry. In the said decision of the Supreme Court in paragraph 28 (9), it was indicated that the workmen employed in the 168 industries mentioned therein would be entitled to the rights and benefits indicated therein which, inter alia, included:-
“(c) All those workmen who agree to shift with the industry shall be given one year’s wages as “shifting bonus” to help them settle in the new location;”
3. Although the factory in which the petitioners were employed was not listed in the 168 industries which were before the Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision, by parity of reasoning inasmuch as the relocation was due to the directions and orders passed by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment, the same conditions would apply to the workmen shifted on account of such relocation. There is no dispute with regard to this. The only submission that has been made by learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.4 & 5 is that only those workmen, who in fact, have shifted or are willing to shift their residence pursuant to the relocation would be entitled to the “shifting bonus”. Those workmen who do not shift their residence would not be entitled to any such bonus referred to in the said decision of the Supreme Court. This submission of the learned counsel for the respondents is not objected to by the learned counsel for the petitioner and it is, therefore, clear that the present writ petition can be disposed of with the direction that all those employees who were earlier working at Lal Kuan, Delhi and have now been relocated to Ghaziabad and who are willing to change their residences to locations near the factory at Ghaziabad would be entitled to “shifting bonus” as indicated by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision. It is made clear that those persons who do not shift or relocate their places of residence would not be entitled to any “shifting bonus”. The “shifting bonus” shall be paid to such of the employees as would be entitled as indicated above within four weeks subject to the employees furnishing proof of shifting in respect of those who have already shifted and those who may shift pursuant to this order.
4. With these directions the writ petition is disposed of.