Veerender Singh Siradhana, J. - (1.) THE batch of writ applications involve common question of law and facts, and therefore, are being adjudicated upon by this common order with the consent of the parties.
(2.) THE petitioners, have assailed the legality and validity of the orders passed by the Government of India declining to make reference of the Industrial Dispute(s) between the parties. In SBCW No. 2257/2007 (Parmanu Vidhyut Karamchari Union & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.), the industrial dispute is between the General Secretary, Rajasthan Anushakti Pariyojna Karamchari Sangh (INTUC), Rawatbhata and Site Director Rajasthan Atomic Power Station, Unit 1 to 4, Po. Anushakti, Rawatbhata, for not according promotion to Shri Sushil Kumar Govil from the post of Trademan E to Trademan F. The Ministry, prima facie, did not find the dispute fit for adjudication for the reason that Shri Sushil Kumar Govil was considered for promotion in November, 2001, but the Standing Selection Committee did not find him fit for promotion. Again on a subsequent consideration by the committee, in the year 2002, the petitioner was not found fit for promotion. According to the prevailing norms of promotion, Shri Sushil Kumar Govil, thereafter was to be considered for promotion after a lapse of 2 years i.e. for the year 2005.
(3.) IN SBCWP No. 6407/2006 (Khemraj Nayak & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr.), the industrial dispute is between the General Secretary, Rajasthan Anushakti Pariyojna Karamchari Sangh (INTUC), Rawatbhata and management of Rajasthan Atomic Power Project Unit 3 & 4, Rawatbhata. The Ministry did not consider the dispute fit for adjudication for the reason that after acceptance of the recommendation of the Anand Committee, the management has re -designated a large section of employees and thus, the claim of the union that the applicants have been degraded arbitrarily has no substance.;