SUMIT SERVICES Vs. BALASAHEB BAJIRAO RAUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Golewar, the learned Advocate for the Petitioner, Mr. Shinde, the learned Advocate for the Respondent No.1 and Mr. Shaikh, the learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

(2.) Petitioners, in both these Writ Petitions, have challenged the Judgment and Award dtd. 7/11/2019, passed by learned Judge, Labour Court, Ahemednagar, in Application (IDA) Nos. 96 of 2016 and 97 of 2016, respectively. As the respondents and the subject matter in both writ petitions are the same, the petitions are taken up together by consent of the parties for final disposal.

(3.) The respondent No.1 in both these writ petitions is the original applicant, whereas the present petitioners and Respondent No.2 are the respondent Nos.2 and 1, respectively. The respondent No.1 in both writ petitions is hereinafter referred to as "Workman". Respondent No.2 is called as "Company" and the petitioners are called as "Service Provider". Both applications in the Labour Court were filed under Sec. 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The facts are also similar in both the petitions.