- (1.) THESE 23 matters are indeed an assortment having common axis in Letters Patent-Appeal No. 402of 1988 which has arisen from a judgment rendered by M. R. Agnihotri, J. , a learned Judge of this Court, in C. W. P. No. 1903 of 1987 (Ashok Kumar Sehgal v. The Punjab State Electricity Board) decided on January 25, 1988. The Division Bench hearing L. P. A. No. 402 of 1988 referred it to be heard by a Full Bench. And the other matters were tagged therewith to be heard by the Full Bench. This is how these matters have been placed before us.
(2.) AT the very outset, we would venture to arrange these matters for facility of disposal in the following categories : (1) LPA NO. 402 of 1988 itself. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the Punjab State Electricity Board (hereafter referred to as the Board) against the judgment and order passed in C. W. P, No. 1903 of 1987 decided on January 25, 1988. (2) Matters directly connected with LPA No. 402 of 1988. These are LPA Nos. 403 to 411 of 1988 and LPA No. 309 of 1988 which have been preferred by the Board against the common judgment and order as passed in C. W. P. Nos. 497, 1440, 1716, 1806, 1812, 1942, 2476, 2609 and 3145 of 1987, which were allowed along with C. W. P. No. 1903 of 1987. L. P. A. No. 309 of 1988 has been preferred by a loosing party respondent in C. W. P. No. 1903 of 1987. L. P. A. No. 547 of 1988 is also against the decision in C. W. P. No. 1903 of 1987 and has been preferred by the Punjab State Electricity Board Diploma-Holders Association after obtaining leave of the Court, since it was claimed that neither the Association-Appellant nor majority of its diploma-holders members had been impleaded as respondents in the said writ petition. (3) Matters indentical with L. P. A. No. 402 of 1988. C. W. P. No. 1637 of 1979 was allowed by J. V. Gupta, J. , another learned single Judge of this Court, on May 25, 1988, relying on the decision in C. W. P. No. 1903 of 1987, L. P. A. No. 661 of 1988 has been preferred by the Board against the said judgment and order. In C. W. P. Nos. 1816, 1817 and 1845 of 1987 the same relief is sought as in C. W. P. No. 1903 of 1987. (4) Matters militating against L. P. A. No. 402 of 1988. C. W. P. No. 3085 of 1988 is preferred by 485 petitioners claiming that the decision in C. W. P. No. 1903 of 1987 be not put to effect as that would lead to the demotion of the petitioners. C. W. P. No. 4138 of 1988 is also to the same effect in which 38 writ petitioners claim identical relief. This petition, however, is at the motion stage and has been listed for disposal. (5) Matters which are admixtured on which the shadow of L. P. A. No. 402 of 1988 broods. C. W. P. No. 1599 of 1985 was dismissed by D. V. Sehgal, J. , another learned single Judge of this Court, on the strength of his earlier decision in Jatinder Singh v. P. S. E. B. , (1986) I Serv LR 692 : (1986 Lab IC 1693 ). L. P. A. No. 283 of 1988 is against the said judgment and order. The other matters which are dependant on the aforesaid case are C. W. P. Nos. 363, 811, 1744 and 3450 of 1987. (6) Other entangled matters. These would be seen as the judgment proceeds.
(3.) THUS, in all we have 23 matters which are being disposed of sequentially by a common judgment.;