- (1.) The present order disposes of a bunch of 10 Letters Patent appeals being LPA No.754 of 2010, LPA No.767 of 2010, LPA No.768 of 2010, LPA No.769 of 2010, LPA No.770 of 2010, LPA No.771 of 2010, LPA No.772 of 2010, LPA No.826 of 2010, LPA No.827 of 2010 and LPA No.870 of 2010 as the issue involved in the present appeals is similar.
(2.) In these bunch of appeals, the respondent-workmen served the appellant as clerks/peons. The nature of their employment was contractual and based merely on resolutions passed by the appellant. It is an undisputed position that before the respondent-workmen were appointed no advertisement was issued, no applications were invited and thus, their appointments could not be termed as appointments made after following fair and transparent selection procedure. None the less before they were relieved as per terms of their contract on 31.3.1997, respondent-workmen had put in services of 2 to 3 years.
(3.) On being relieved, the respondent-workmen raised industrial disputes challenging their relieving/termination. The labour Court at Gurdaspur went through the claims raised by the respondent-workmen. In the cases of 8 workmen namely Sarabjit Singh, Nirmal Singh, Suresh Singh, Raman Kumar, Viney Kumar, Hardeep Singh, Vishpal Singh and Surinder Kumar, the labour Court came to the conclusion that their services had been wrongfully terminated and resultantly orders of their reinstatement with full back wages were passed. However, in the case of two workmen namely Deepak Kumar and Hardeep Sharma, the labour Court found their termination to be legal and thus, rejected their claims.;