JUDGMENT :

N.B. Suryawanshi, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned advocates for the parties.

2. Since these petitions raise similar questions of law and facts, they were heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

3. On the basis of domestic inquiry held, the petitioners were dismissed vide order dated 16th August, 2011. The respondent, therefore, filed application under section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter for short "the said Act") seeking approval to the dismissal of the petitioners.

4. The petitioners, by filing written statements and say, resisted the said application.

5. On 31st December, 2018, the respondent filed applications contending that as held by the Apex Court in the case of "M/s. Cooper Engineering V/s. P.P. Mundhe" 1975 (2) SCC 661, it would be expedient to decide legality and propriety of the domestic inquiry held against the respondents (present petitioners) as preliminary issue and in the event the Industrial Tribunal holds the inquiry in the present matter is vitiated and findings of the inquiry officer are perverse, the employer has a legal right to lead evidence to p