JUDGMENT - Smt. NISHITA MHATRE, J.:---Both these writ petitions can be disposed of by a common judgment since the facts and the order impugned in both the writ petitions are same.

2. The petitioners have impunged the common order of the Industrial Court dated 28th July, 1995 denying them permanency and the benefits attached to the same from the date of their appointments. Both the petitioners were employed as “fireman” with the first respondent Municipal Council. They were employed to fill in permanent vacancies. However, in order to avoid the effect of the Standing Orders and the labour laws applicable, the first respondent discontinued the petitioners from service on completion of three months. The petitioners continued in service, always with breaks, from 1976 onwards. They were also given wage rise every year while in service. However, the benefits of permanency were not given to the petitioners. They, therefore, filed individual complaints before the Industrial Court, Thane, for a declaration that the first respondent had committed unfair labour practices under Items 5, 6, and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Pract

Click Here to Read the rest of this document