- (1.) By all these petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned the award dated 09.12.2011 passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal"), Karkardooma Court, Delhi in ID No.04/2010, 17/2010, 03/2010, 15/2010, 08/2010, 10/2010, 16/2010, 18/2010, 07/2010, 09/2010, 05/2010, 14/2010 and 06/2010 respectively whereby the labour court allowed the claim filed by the respondent No.2 (workman in all the respective petitions) and accordingly directed reinstatement of the respondent No.2 in the service of the University with continuity and consequential benefits alongwith 20% back wages from the date of alleged retrenchment till the date of the award becoming operative under Section 17A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the "ID Act").
(2.) Since all these petitions are between the same parties, all the petitions are against award dated 09.12.2011 passed by the Tribunal and involve identical question of law, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of brevity the facts are being extracted from W.P.(C) No.901/2014.
(3.) Briefly stating the facts as emerging from the said petition are that the petitioner entered into a contract with Sybex Computer System Pvt. Ltd. vide agreement dated 01.11.2004 for outsourcing housekeeping services. This contract was subsequently extended upto 31.10.2007. Respondent No.2 was working with the said contractor to provide housekeeping services in the petitioner's campus. With effect from 01.11.2007, the contract for providing housekeeping services was given to Spick & Span Facilities Management Pvt. Ltd. The new contractor brought his own housekeeping staff for the duration of its contract.;