S.D. Anand, J. - (1.) The commonness of law point involved in these three writ petitions (CWP Nos. 7859 of 1987, 8905 of 1987 and 7465 of 1987) persuades me to dispose these of by a common order. Facts in CWP No. 7859 and 7465 of 1987
(2.) The petitioners joined the employment of respondent No. 2 Punjab State Tubewell Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) during the period 1977 to 1981 in different capacities. Their placements in employment and the date of joining is indicated in detail in chart, Annexure P1. All of them are in employment in Sangrur Circle. All of them received letter dated 29.9.1987 from the Corporation informing them that they were being retrenched with effect from 31.10.1987. Translated copies of the specimen intimation letters are on file as Annexures P2 to P8. The respondents have acted arbitrarily by having retrenched the petitioners, while retaining their juniors in employment. It is also the averment by the petitioners that the stance adopted by the Corporation that the petitioners have been rendered surplus on account of shortage of work was denied.
(3.) Yet another averment made by the petitioners is as under: The seniority of workcharge staff (a category to which the petitioners belonged, as per the averment) is maintained circle -wise in pursuance of an agreement dated 17.12.1985 (Annexure P11), which had been entered between the Corporation and the representatives of the Employees' Union. Prior thereto, the seniority was maintained Division -wise. The Corporation has circles in Amritsar, Bathinda, Ferozepur and Sangrur. Each circle has four Divisions. The petitioners belonged to one circle which had been merged into Bathinda circle. Initially, the Corporation had banned the inter -Division transfer of workcharge employees. Vide letter dated 10.7.1986 (Annexure P12), it was announced that an employee desiring to go to inter Division shall have to resign and seek fresh appointment in the Division of his own choice. However, inspite thereof, the Corporation has been transferring various persons from one Division to another without effecting their seniority. The further averment, in the context, is that the respondent -Corporation is indulging in illegal practice or retrenching the work charge staff by a pick and choose method. The principle of first come last go has not been followed by the Corporation. The Corporation with a view to protect certain employees generally close a division and merge it with a division of other circle with a result that the employees of closed division don't loose their seniority and employees of the division to which the merger takes place are pushed down in their respective seniority lists. Thereafter, the Corporation does the retrenchment and employees who are pushed down in the seniority list are retrenched first whereas employees of the closed Division stay in service. This practice is often adopted by the Corporation to protect the employees of their choice. For illustration following Divisions have been closed and merged with the other divisions of other circles resulting in total break down of circle wise seniority.;