I.S.TIWANA,J. - (1.) In view of the similarity of facts and the identity of the contentions raised, I propose to dispose of these two writ petitions No. 3385 and 3295 of 1974 filed by the same petitioners through this common judgment.
(2.) As per the allegations of the petitioners, who are father and son they were the proprietors of it firm known as Nirmal Industries engaged in the "fabrication of hosiery products. "According to them, this concern came to an end in April, 1971. The two private respondents in these two petitions used to work with them as piece rate workers and were being paid according to the number of articles produced by them.
(3.) On October 26, 1971, Secretary of the District Hosiery Textile Workers Union served a notice on the petitioners on behalf of Sham Lal respondent No. 5 in C.W.P. No. 3385/74 alleging that the services of the latter had illegally been terminated by the petitioners and he was entitled to full compensation on account of the said termination. Similar notice was served on the petitioners on March 16, 1972 by the said Secretary of the Union on behalf of Om Parkash respondent No. 4 in C. W. P. No. 3295174. According to the petitioners, the said notices were absolutely illegal and without any basis. They simply ignored these. Later on this matter of termination of the services of the two respondents was adjudicated upon by the Labour Court, Ludhiana, as a result of two, separate references made under section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act (for short, the Act) by the State Government. In both the cases the Labour Court pronounced two ex parte awards, Annexure P. 3 (C.W.P. No 3385/74) and Annexure P. 6 (C.W.P. No. 3295/74). Vide Annexure P. 3 the petitioners were directed to pay back wages to Sham Lal at the rate of Rs. 550 per month from September 15, 1971 to February 28, 1973. This later date was fixed by the Court on account of the fact that the Court had found that the factory of the petitioners was closed with effect from that date, though now the petitioners have alleged that it was closed somewhere in April, 1971. Vide the other award and Annexure P. 6, the petitioners were directed to reinstate Om Parkash workman with continuity of service and to pay him wages at the rate of Rs. 550 per month with effect from August 24, 1971 to the date of actual reinstatement. It is pertinent to note here that both these awards Annexures P. 3 and P. 6 were made by the Labour Court on the same date i.e. October 19, 1973. On a still later date when the awardees chose to enforce the awards, the petitioner made separate applications for the setting aside of these on the ground that there had been no propor and legal service on them of the summons issued by the Labour Court and no hearing had been afforded to them. Both these applications were dismissed by the Labour Court on the solitary ground that the applications having been filed after more than 30 days of the publication of the either of the awards in the Government gazette the labour court had become functus officio by that time and thus the two applications to that effect were not maintainable. These orders of the Labour Court are Annexure P. 5 in C.W.P. No. 338514 and Annexure P.R. in 0.P. No. 3295174.;