G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. - (1.) THE present judgment shall dispose of 21 cases i.e. CWP Nos. 483, 484, 485, 486, 487, 488, 489, 491, 492, 493, 494, 495, 496, 497, 498, 499, 500, 528, 529, 530 and 531 of 2014, as common questions of facts and law are involved in all the writ petitions. Facts are being taken from CWP No. 483 of 2014, Chairman -cum -Managing Director, Thapar House, Ballarpur Industries and another vs. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala and another in which, the dispute is between the management and Subhash Chander -the workman.
(2.) CHALLENGE in the present petition is to the award dated 30.10.2013 (Annexure P -1) vide which, respondent no. 2 -workman was reinstated with continuity of service and full back wages alongwith compensatory costs of Rs.11,000/ - by way of damages for mental and physical ordeal were awarded alongwith lawyer's fee of Rs.11,000/ - in each case. The reason given for the said reinstatement was that the voluntary retirement scheme (in short 'VRS') was forcibly got signed from the workmen under threat and pressure of illegal and mala fide transfer from Yamuna Nagar to Barabanki (U.P.) and it amounted to unfair labour practice. A perusal of the writ petition would go on to show that on 09.03.2010 (Annexure P -7), a legal notice was got served by the workman upon the management and the Labour -cum -Conciliation Officer that the workman, who was appointed as Junior Clerk in the management on 01.06.1986 and was a confirmed employee, had been harassed at the hands of the management by compelling him to accept the Ballarpur Industries Ltd. (BILT) Voluntary Retirement Scheme for (Non -Management) Clerk Staff, 2009, which was in force from 23.01.2009 to 16.02.2009. The scheme had not been opted for and the workmen were transferred to Barabanki (U.P.) and they were offered certain monetary benefits to attract them and it was offered that one eligible son or daughter in the family would be adjusted in the management and also majority of them were not allowed to enter the mill's entrance gate in the morning when they came to report to their routine duty. They were asked to vacate their official company residential quarters immediately on account of their transfer orders and it was in such circumstances, they had signed under protest on the said scheme. Some of the clerical staff members were to retire in the year 2018 but they were compelled to sign upon the said scheme and the union did not support the cause and the removal from service on 01.04.2009 was illegal without following proper procedure and accordingly, the demand was made to take back the workman in service.
(3.) THEREAFTER , demand notice under Section 2A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short 'the Act') was served on the same set of allegations on 04.06.2010 and the matter was referred to the Labour Court for adjudication vide order dated 20.12.2010 which was contested by filing a written statement.;