ORAL JUDGMENT:- Since the facts and the law points involved in these three petitions are common, same are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. By way of present petitions, the petitioners challenge the common judgment and order passed by the learned Industrial Court dated 9th March, 1994, thereby allowing the complaints filed by the respondent No. 2 herein original complainants.

3. The respondent No.2 in these writ petitions who are employees of the petitioners, had filed Complaint Nos. 122/86, 123/86 and 126/86, under section 28 read with Items 5 and 9 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Act" for the sake of brevity). It was alleged in the said complaints that the complainants were initially appointed as Mazdoor on daily wages by the present petitioners. It was further alleged that the complainants were brought on Converted Regular Temporary Employee (hereinafter referred to as CRT.E. for the sake of brevity) as Mazdoor as per the decision of the State Government communicated vide letter dated 10th January, 1983. It is alleged that all the persons similarly situated with the complainants, were promoted to the post of Karkuns, by the order dated 1st January, 1986, by the State Government. It was alleged that though the complainants were entitled to be promoted along with those persons, they were denied promotion to the posts of Karkuns. It was alleged that since the complainants were engaged in the trade unions activities, their legitimate claim was denied. It was further alleged that the complainants were, in fact, doing the work of Karkuns and as such were entitled to be promoted as such with retrospective effect i.e. from 4-11-1981, 4-7-1981 and 9-8-1978.

4. The learned Industrial Court arrived at a finding of fact that all the complainants were, in fact, doing the work of Karkuns. It was also found that the names of the complainants were proposed for bringing them to CRT.E. as Karkuns. The learned Industrial Court, therefore, found that they were qualified to be promoted as Karkuns, and that they were entitled to be brought on CRT.E. as Karkuns. The learned Industrial Court, therefore, by the judgment and order dated 9th March, 1994, allowed the complaints and directed the petitioners to bring the complainants on CRT.E. as Karkuns from 4-11-1981,4-7-1981 and 98-1978. Vide the said order, the learned Industrial Court also granted all the benefits to be extended to the complainants with effect from the said dates. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed by the learned Industrial Court, the petitioners have approached this Court by way of present writ petitions.

5. Vide order dated 27th June, 1995, this Court issued Rule. While issuing Rule, this Court refused to grant any interim relief in favour of the petitioners. However, the proceedings in criminal complaints filed by the respondent No. 2employees were stayed on the condition that the petitioners implement the order under challenge.

6. It is clear from the record that thereafter, civil applications were filed by the petitioners, in all the three petitions, for modification of the earlier order passed by this Court, insofar as it refuses to grant any interim relief. The petitioners had fairly stated that the petitioners were willing to deposit the amount of backwages in this Court, which would be permitted to be withdrawal by the respondents-employees on furnishing solvent surety. It was also stated that the petitioners will make the payment to the respondents-employees as Karkuns every month. However, this Court declined to review its earlier order dated 26th June, 1995. Thus it is not in dispute that on account of non-grant of interim relief, the respondent No.2-employees have not only continued to work as Karkuns but have also been paid backwages with effect from the dates mentioned in the order of the learned Industrial Court dated

Click Here to Read the rest of this document