The present appellants challenged the judgment of the High Court in Civil Appeal No.1734 of 2004.
The High Court by the impugned judgment held that the award of the Industrial Tribunal 3 , U.P., Kanpur in short the Tribunal dated 30.7.1999 did number require any interference and the writ petition filed by the appellants deserves to be dismissed.
The High Court numbered that there were two orders one passed by the Commissioner dated 6th August, 1999 which was the subject matter of challenge in writ petition No.47303 of 1999 and the other was passed by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal had answered the reference in the following terms On the basis of the pleadings of the parties and evidence on record my companyclusion to the reference is that the action of the employer No.1 in number regularizing the services of 118 employees mentioned in the reference is justified and valid and that the workmen companycerned are number entitled for any relief.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
This is second journey of the appellants to this Court.
The workmen had challenged the award dated 30.7.1999 and Writ Petition No.47303 of 1999 was disposed of by the High Court by order dated 11th July, 2003.
By judgment dated 15.9.2005, this Court set aside the order holding that the High Court ought to have taken both the writ petitions together as the issue was the same.
A Writ Petition No.47303 of 1999 was filed by the employers who are the present appellants questioning companyrectness of the order dated 6.8.1999 passed by the Labour Commissioner in short the Commissioner under Rule 25 2 v a of the U.P. Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Rules, 1975 in short the Rules .
