JUDGMENT :

V. Eswaraiah, J.—Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the respondents.

2. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are one and the same and the second respondent is a different workman in all the writ petitions. The petitioners filed these writ petitions to issue a writ of certiorari, calling for the records relating to individual Interlocutory Applications filed in different Industrial Disputes filed by the concerned second respondent in each of the industrial dispute and to quash the order dated 19-1-2004 made in the Interlocutory Applications.

3. The petitioners' company is the Private Limited Company, engaged in the business of polishing rough diamonds of its clients and exporting the same. The concerned second respondent in each of the writ petitions were appointed as trainees. It is stated that the said workmen were disengaged. Aggrieved by the same, the workmen raised conciliation proceedings and thereafter filed an application u/s 2-A(ii) of the Industrial Disputes Act (in short Act), challenging their termination, before the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Visakhapatnam.

4. It is the case of the workmen that they were appointed