Ranjan Gogoi, J. - (1.) THESE appeals by the Management being directed against the common order dated 21.07.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge were heard together and are being disposed of by the present order.
(2.) THE facts in brief may be noticed at the outset. By an award passed in the year 1993, each of the Respondent -workman in the six appeals under consideration was directed to be reinstated. The details of the dates of award passed in each of the cases; the dates of publication thereof in the official, Gazette; the dates on which the Respondent -workman claims to have submitted the joining reports; as well as the dates of their actual joining are reflected below. The chart below also indicates the period/dates for which claims were made by the workmen under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'): JUDGEMENT_169_LLJ4_2011.htm
(3.) THE dates of joining of the Respondent -workmen were preceded by the institution of separate writ petitions filed by each of the workman seeking a direction for enforcement of the award which was granted by this Court by the orders passed on different dates. After the reinstatement on the dates as noticed above, the Respondent -workmen filed applications under Section 33C(2) of the Act for payment of wages due to them in terms of the award. In the proceedings before the Industrial Court out of which LPA Nos. 22, 23, 24 and 26 of 2010 arises. Orders were passed by the learned Labour Court allowing the claim of wages for a period of three years prior to the date of the application(s). In so far as the proceedings out of which LPA Nos. 25 and 27 arises, the claims of the workmen were dismissed primarily on the ground that the workmen could not satisfy the learned Labour Court that they had raised a demand to be allowed to join in service pursuant to the award passed.;