R.B.Mehrotra, J. - (1.) In all the above seven writ petitions, the same question of law is involved for consideration. On facts also, there is exact similarity for the purposes of deciding the controversy in the writ petitions except in the matter of actual dates in regard to different writ petitions. These small variations on facts, however, do not call for a separate consideration of individual case. The parties counsel have agreed that all the seven writ petitions may be heard and decided as same questions are involved in these writ petitions.
(2.) However, for convenience of noticing the necessary facts, Civil Misc. Writ petition No. 21679 of 1987 is being treated as a leading case.
(3.) Factual matrix necessary for decision in the writ petition is noticed hereunder: Some of the muster roll employees employed in various Divisions of the U.P.State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) were terminated from their service from 1st of February 1979. In the Division to which the present writ petition is concerned, it is stated that services of 60 and odd workers were dispensed with from the aforesaid Division. Out of those workers, whose services were terminated, some of them filed their claim applications before the Regional Conciliation Officer. Subsequently an order was made by the State Government under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and an award was given in favour of the workmen directing their reinstatement.;