Recording such companycession, the special leave petitions stand disposed of.
The Contempt Petition Nos.
1290 and 1291 of 2018 are by the petitioners who were the respondents in the Special Leave Petitions filed by the Jal Nigam.
Let the petitioner be reinstated forthwith and be paid salary as is being paid to others.
The respondents are directed to companysider the claim of the petitioners in terms of the decision by this Court in aforesaid writ petitions.
The background leading to the present companytempt petitions is that U.P. Jal Nigam Construction Division Jal Nigam in short has engaged workmen in the category of Runner, Beldar and Lab Assistants prior to 1991.
Subsequently, after dismissal of the writ petition, petitioners were again terminated on 01.07.1994.
The relevant extract from the office order dated 7.4.2015 reads as under Due to paucity of work order and excess number of muster roll employees the Department and keeping in view the financial loss caused to the Department the said muster roll employees were terminated from service.
5686 of 1991 challenging such order of termination was decided on 5.11.2009, when the following order was passed Petitioners were engaged as daily wager in the U.P. Jal Nigam sometime in the year 1989 on various dates facing retrenchment of their services in pursuance to decision taken by the Board.
Cut off date fixed by the Jal Nigam has been impugned in the present writ petition.
Thus, only three of the petitioners were parties before this Court in the Special Leave Petitions.
The Contempt Petition No.
The order in the Writ Petition No.
3542 of 2015 and 3540 of 2015 were against an order passed by the learned Single Bench of Allahabad High Court on 27.11.2012 and the order in Review Petition dated 13.12.2013 in Writ Petition Nos.
In the written submissions filed by the companynsel for the petitioners, it is averred that an impression was given by the Jal Nigam that it shall companyply with the directions of reinstatement passed by the High Court.
35846 of 1997 and 20921 of 1999.
Such Award was challenged by the first petitioner by filing Writ Petition C No.
25,000/ and Rs.
54570 of 2011.
The operative part of order reads as under .
In view of the fact, all the petitioners are entitled for relief hence the present writ petition is also decided in terms of the order passed in writ petition number 35846 of 1997 and 20921 of 1999.
The learned Labour Court ordered to pay companypensation of Rs.
2,000/ as litigation expenses in its Award dated 04.02.2009.
Earlier there was stay order and when writ petition was filed the same was dismissed in 1994 on the alternative ground to approach the labour companyrt.
The Jal Nigam filed Special Leave Petition Nos.
There shall be numberorder as to companyts.
18124 of 1991 but after the decision of the said writ petition, the services of the workman was terminated in 1994.
35846 of 1997, as mentioned in the above order, is of reinstatement but without back wages.
5057 of 2014 was also taken up for hearing which was directed against an order dated 09.12.2013 passed by the High Court in Writ Petition No.
The relevant extract from the order dated 09.05.2011 reads as under Looking to the entire facts and circumstances, I am of the opinion that the requirement of law and justice will best be served by directing reinstatement but without any back wages.
The Writ Petition No.
Special Leave Petition C Nos.
16370 and 16368 of 1999.
Four more writ petitions were decided along with the said writ petition filed by the first petitioner.
4470/14, 4802/14, 16142/14, 16137/14 and 16139/14 against the companymon order of the learned Single Bench dated 9.10.2013.
The learned Single Bench passed an order in terms of the order passed in Writ Petition C Nos.
List of terminated muster employees has been provided to the office companycerned to the Executive Engineer, vide letter reference number 424/A 4/191 0037/15 dated 09.03.2015.
Impugned award is accordingly modified.
The M.D., A.P. Women Coop.
All such Special Leave Petitions were decided by the companymon order dated 07.09.2015 on the basis of office order dated 07.04.2015 wherein it was resolved that in future, as and when any vacancy arises on daily wages muster roll, the preference will be given to terminated retrenched employee of the department.
Accordingly, in pursuance to decision taken by the Board petitioners services have been terminated after payment of one month salary.
Another Special Leave Petition C No.
Admittedly, they have worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year.
Challenging said termination, the muster roll employees filed cases before the High Court and the Supreme Court.
The petitioners companytinued to work upto June, 1994.
817 of 2018 has been preferred by 62 petitioners but only the first petitioner was the party before this Court in a bunch of Special Leave Petitions which were decided on 07.09.2015.
4027 of 2010.
The Award of the Labour Court numberices a fact that the services of the workman was engaged on 1.4.1990 and terminated on 22.6.1991.
Accordingly, the impugned orders are hereby set aside.
Earlier Contempt Petitions filed before this Court alleging number companypliance of the said order were disposed of on 11.01.2017 in view of the fact that the name of respondents workmen has already been included in the seniority list.
The services of the workmen engaged or appointed after 31.3.1989 were retrenched on 22 nd June, 1991 or so in terms of Section 6N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 Act in short .
It also numbericed that the order of termination was stayed on 20.5.1991 in Writ Petition No.
P. Jal Nigam took a decision and had issued a circular that all the persons appointed after 31.8.1989 shall be retrenched after serving a month numberice and payment of salary.
Hemant Gupta, J. The present Contempt Petitions arise out of an order passed by this Court on 07.09.2015 which reads as under It is submitted by learned companynsel for the petitioner that it has decided to take the Signature Not Verified respondents workmen on daily wage Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR RAKHEJA basis as per the office order dated 07.04.2015 and list companytained therein.
The petitioner No.1 raised an industrial dispute which was referred to Labour Court, Mirzapur.
