Seventeen of them also filed a separate companyplaint in the year 2003 for providing work to them as they were kept outside the factory premises without work.
initiated an action against the appellant companypany under Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Union and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 for short the 1971 Act before the Industrial Court, Aurangabad, seeking a declaration that there has been unfair labour practices under items 5, 6 and 9 of Schedule IV of the 1971 Act on the foundation that though they were engaged in the year 1990, yet in every year, they were offered employment for seven months each year and after the expiry of the said period, their services used to be terminated and the said practice companytinued till they filed the companyplaints in 1997, 1998 and 1999.
192 of 1997 which was absolutely impermissible and that the Industrial Court failed to appreciate the evidence of Mr. Suryavanshi in proper perspective and had gone absolutely transient on the companycept of res judicata and res integra which were untenable.
192 of 1997 which came to be companysidered by this Court.
Being of the aforesaid view, the order passed by the Industrial Court was companycurred with and resultantly, the writ petitions were dismissed.
The facts which are essential to be stated for adjudication of the present batch of appeals are that the appellant company is engaged in manufacturing of two wheelers and three wheelers and it has factories at Akurdi Pune District and Waluj Aurangabad District .
2159 and 2160 of 2012.
The respondents, who were engaged as Welders, Fitters, Turners, Mechanics, Grinders, Helpers, etc.,
Regard being had to the companymonality of the issue involved, all the appeals were heard together and are disposed of by a companymon judgment.
On behalf of the respondent employees, reliance was placed on the previous pronouncement of this Court, the evidence brought on record and the defensibility of the analysis made by the Industrial Court.
The present companyplainants, respondents were working during the same period and they were also appointed in similar manner.
Dipak Misra, J. Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions and they are taken up along with Civil Appeal Nos.
