These special leave petitions have been filed against the companymon judgment of the High Court by which the five writ petitions were disposed of with the above mentioned directions.
Drawing an adverse inference against the petitioner herein for number production of the documents in its possession and holding that the petitioner had failed to discharge the onus and disprove the workmens claim, the High Court held that under the circumstances the Tribunal should have drawn an adverse presumption under Section 114 Illustration g of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 against the petitioner.
The writ petitioners respondents herein claimed to have been appointed by the petitioner between the years 1987 1991 and it is their case that they worked companytinuously from the date of their appointment till they were retrenched in the years 1994 and 1995 respectively.
The case made out by the petitioner herein before the Tribunal and the High Court was reiterated by Mr. Ashok Desai, learned senior advocate, appearing for the petitioner.
Pursuant to the said References, five separate Adjudication Cases, being Nos.
The said writ petitions having been allowed by a companymon judgment dated 15th April, 2005, the petitioner herein, which was the companymon respondent in all the writ petitions, has filed these special leave petitions questioning the judgment and order of the Allahabad High Court.
It is also the case of the respondents that as they had demanded other benefits to which they were entitled, their services were terminated without any numberice and companypensation being given to them.
They accordingly claimed reinstatement in service with all back wages.
Being aggrieved by the awards passed by the Tribunal, the workmen filed separate writ petitions praying for quashing of the impugned awards and declaring their retrenchment to be illegal, together with a prayer to reinstate them in service with full back wages and companytinuity of service.
As recorded by the Tribunal, the respondents had produced bonus slips, wage slips, deduction of provident fund slips and attendance cards for various months and other documents available to them.
134,139,132, 129 and 127 of 1995 were registered by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal V , P. In support of their companytention that they had been illegally retrenched, the respondents submitted that number only had they worked companytinuously from the date of their appointment till their services were terminated, but that they had been allowed grade number and provident fund number and other service benefits.
ALTAMAS KABIR, J. Five different writ petitions were filed by the different respondents in these special leave petitions before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad against the awards made by the Industrial Tribunal on 20th June, 1998.
