- (1.) We have heard Mr.Muktesh Maheshwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr.D.S.Rajvi, learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) Both the Special Appeals raise similar questions of law and are, thus, decided by a common judgment.
(3.) The Indian Telephone Industries (for short, "the ITI") invited names from the Employment Exchange for engagement on the post of Technician and LDC (Accounts Clerk) in the year 1987. Ashok Kumar Sharma, respondent in Writ Petition No.3283/2001 was qualified and was called for interview on 12.11.1987. He was appointed on 28.11.1987. His services were extended from 31.12.1990 and, thereafter, he continued on the post upto 31.3.1992, when his services were dispensed-with on the ground that the work on the project was complete. He filed a Writ Petition No.2225/1992 "Ashok Kumar vs. Union of India", which was dismissed on 12.3.1996 on the ground of alternative remedy. He made an application to the State Government on which a reference was made to the Industrial Tribunal, Bikaner to decide the labour dispute. The Reference No.56/1998 was made to decide as to whether the termination order dated 31.3.1992 was valid and legal? The Industrial Tribunal passed the award on 23.2.2001 and quashed the termination order dated 31.3.1992 with directions to treat the workman to continue in service with costs of Rs.5000/-. The award was published on 12.6.2001. A Writ Petition No.3283/2001 filed by the appellant-ITI was dismissed on 30.10.2012 giving rise to D.B.Civil Special Appeal No.58/2013.;