JUDGMENT :

1. These are the petitions preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the group of petitioners. There are cross petitions preferred by the employers and employees in the present group of petitions, the list of which is as under : -

2. The facts of each pair of cross cases are briefly stated before adjudicating all these matters by a common judgment because of involvement of identical questions of facts and law in them.

2.1. SCA 20078/2017 (by the employer) and its cross petition SCA 6571/2018 (by the employee)

2.1.1. The employer – petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 16.06.2017 of the Industrial Court, Surat in Appeal (IC) No. 54 of 2007 aggrieved by the grant of backwages to the tune of 70%.

According to the petitioner, the respondent – employee was working in the engineering branch of the petitioner whose date of birth is 24.03.1958 and he reached the age of superannuation on 24.03.2018. He was issued the charge-sheet on 19.10.1994 for disobeying the lawful order of the superiors and after a full-fledged inquiry, he was dismissed from service on 03.05.1995. At that time, he was paid gratuity at the tune of Rs. 26,281/- and other retiral benefits to the tune of Rs. 5,896.80/-. Thus, the total amount paid to the respondent was already sent by way of a cheque and when he chose not to accept, the petitioner has deposited the amount of Rs. 5,896/- with Gujarat Labour Welfare Commissioner. Therefore, direction of paying gratuity of Rs. 26,281/- with 9% interest is erroneous. Other details with regard to the examination of witnesses and the chronology of events baring the number of appeal and SCA preferred before this Court being 2963 and 2966 of 2007 are identical.

2.1.2. In the cross petition preferred by the employee being SCA 6571/2018, the petitioner seeks to challenge the very judgment and order terming the same as illegal and unjust order dated 21.09.2007 passed by the Labour Court, Valsad in T Application No. 14 of 1995 as well as the order dated 16.06.2017 passed by the Industrial Court, Surat in Appeal (IC) No. 54 of 2007 and 58 of 2007.

It is the say of the petitioner herein that the co employee, Shri Kantilal Amrutlal Rana (Petitioner of SCA 6576/18) also on similar facts and circumstances has preferred a petition and he seeks to depend on the details provided in that petition. It is also averred that the Labour Court had granted permission to conduct inquiry by the respondent management vide order dated 21.04.2005. The said order was challenged by the respondent before the Industrial Court, Surat however, the revision application was dismissed on 07.07.2007. Against the said order, the present respondent had preferred Special Civil Application Nos. 6213 to 6223 of 2008 before this Court which have been dismissed for having become infructuous. Accordingly, the orders became final. After the said order also, the respondent authority did not conduct any inquiry and accordingly the respondent was directed to reinstate the petitioner however, the petitioner was not allowed to resume the duty and he was held entitled to place the petitioner on suspension and to hold departmental inquiry. Neither the petitioner was placed under suspension nor the departmental inquiry was conducted by the respondent.

When the L