- (1.) List revised. Inspite of sufficient service, no one appears for the workmen Respondents in any of the writ petitions. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner employer.
(2.) These writ petitions are directed against combined award dated 29.10.1997 given by Presiding Officer, Labour Court (IV), U.P. Kanpur in Adjudication Cases No. 82/94, 90/96, 91/96 and 100/96. The first writ petition relates to Adjudication Case No. 90/96. The second writ petition relates to Adjudication Case No. 91/96. The third writ petition relates to Adjudication Case No. 100/96. The fourth writ petition relates to Adjudication Case No. 82/94. Prem Prakash Dubey is workman Respondent No. 3 in the first writ petition. Ashok Kumar son of Agya Ram is workman Respondent No. 3 in the second writ petition. Sudhir Kumar Pandey is workman Respondent No. 3 in the third writ petition. Ashok Kumar son of Sri Ganga Ram is workman Respondent No. 3 in the fourth writ petition.
(3.) The matters, which were referred to the labour Court, were as to whether the action of the Petitioner employer terminating the services of its aforesaid four workmen w.e.f. 9.2.1993 was just and legal or not. The main defence of the employer was that the workmen were employees of a thekedar. The labour Court after thorough enquiry held that contesting Respondents were employees of the Petitioner. The alleged thekedar was not produced. No evidence was filed by the Petitioners to show that either the work of the contesting Respondents was supervised by the thekedar or they were paid their wages by him. An agreement was also entered into in between workmen and Petitioner employer. The version of the employer that at the time of agreement thekedar was present, however at the time of signing on the agreement he had left was rightly disbelieved by the labour Court. Ultimately termination orders were held illegal on the ground that no retrenchment compensation had been paid to the workmen as required by Section 6-N of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act and reinstatement with full back wages was directed in each case. In these writ petitions on 20.7.1998, interim orders were passed staying the operation of the impugned awards only in so far as they directed payment of back wages provided that rest of the awards were implemented within a month.;