TILAK RAJ SACHDEVA Vs. CGIT CUM LABOUR COURT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four petitions raise a common question of law which shall stand disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The short question that arises for consideration requires the narration of brief facts which are encapsulated as follows:

(3.) Therefore, the Industrial Adjudicator came to the considered opinion that the application filed by the petitioners was not maintainable and that there could be no computation of the amounts claimed by the petitioners in the proceedings before the Industrial Adjudicator. The Industrial Adjudicator, however, granted the petitioners liberty to go for a reference under Section 10(1) of the ID Act. The petitioners assail the correctness of the impugned Awards each dated 20th April, 1998, in the present petitions, respectively.