- (1.) ALL these appeals were heard analogously as the facts are similar and the issues involved are also identical. The judgment under appeal has, in fact, been passed by the learned single judge in W. P. No. 5354 (W)/2005 whereby and whereunder the learned single Judge was pleased to dismiss the writ petition and the appeal preferred from the said judgment under appeal dated March 2,2007 has been numbered as M. A. T. No. 812/2007.
(2.) FOLLOWING the aforesaid judgment under appeal dated March 2, 2007 passed by the learned single Judge in W. P. No. 5354 (W)/2005 various other writ petitions filed on identical grounds under similar facts were also disposed of by the said learned single Judge wherefrom several appeals have also been preferred out of which these appeals were listed before this Bench and heard analogously. Now, we dispose of all these appeals by this common judgment.
(3.) THE writ petition bearing W. P. No. 5354 (W)/2005 was filed challenging the order dated December 31, 2004 passed by the assistant Labour Commissioner-11 (C), inter alia, contending that the said Assistant Labour commissioner in the context of the facts and provisions of law was not competent to embark upon adjudication of the claim application of the employee concerned. It was further contended in the said writ petition that the assistant Labour Commissioner-II (C)proceeded on an erroneous appreciation of facts and law.;