D.K.Seth, J. - (1.) These bunch petitions were disposed of following the decision in the writ petition No. 14033 of 1992 Dr. J.B. Banerjee and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors. Subsequently an application for review has been filed on behalf of the respondents. The said review application has been taken up for hearing alongwith these Bunch cases on merits inasmuch as it was contended that the facts of these bunch cases are not identical with that of Dr. J.B. Banerjee's case (supra).
(2.) After having heard learned counsel for either side, in my view the contention raised by the learned counsel for respondent that the facts are not identical and issues are distinguishable is correct. Therefore, the application for review is allowed. Since learned counsel for the parties have agreed that the matter may be disposed of on merits, the hearing of the matter was also taken up simultaneously.
(3.) A very short question arises in the present case which Mr. Rakesh Pandey, learned counsel has raised is that the reference, which is admittedly a second one, made by the Government under Section 10(1) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' is valid and cannot be challenged as a preliminary issue in view of the decision in the case of D. P. Maheshwari v. Delhi Administration and Ors. (1983-II-LLJ-425) (SC).;