KRISHAN CHAND Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order of mine shall dispose of six writ petitions bearing Nos. 10032, 13365, 13390 of 2010, 4272 and 4275 of 2011, as issue and question raised in the aforementioned writ petitions is the same.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience, the facts are being taken from CWP No. 10032 of 2010.

(3.) MR . A.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the Award of the Labour Court suffers from illegality and perversity, inasmuch as that termination of the petitioners is against settled proposition of law and without appreciating the facts proved on file. He further submitted that all the petitioners were appointed as Fitter in the year 1995 on consolidated salary of Rs. 2470/ - and their services were allegedly terminated on 14.06.1997 and thereafter, demand notice was served in the month of June, 1997. It has further been submitted that the employer changed the name of the company and by taking the advantage of the same, services of the petitioners and similarly situated persons have been terminated. Though the promoters of the company, much less, working of the company are same and accordingly, after failure of conciliation proceedings, the matter was referred to the Labour Court. He also submitted that the petitioners are entitled to be reinstated into service along with continuity and full back wages as the respondent -Company has given appointment to some employees with back wages and continuity of service, but the petitioners have not been offered any employment as per agreement dated 12.6.1997, Ex.R -3 and supplementary agreement dated 12.06.1997, Ex.R -4.