ORDER :

1. The group of Letters Patent Appeal No. 399 of 2022 and allied appeals have been filed by the State Authorities challenging the common CAV judgment dated 5.11.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge (Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bhargav D. Karia) in captioned writ petitions whereas Letters Patent Appeal No. 1557 of 2022 and allied appeals have been filed against the oral order dated 15.09.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge (Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Supehia) in captioned writ petitions.

2. As the common question of law and facts arise in all these appeals, they are being heard and decided together with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties.

3. The short facts arise from the record of the Letters Patent Appeal No. 399 of 2022 and allied matters are as under:

3.1. That the respondents-daily wagers who were working with the Forest Department with various unit of Forest Department raised an industrial dispute challenging their illegal termination though they have worked for various years for 240 days in each years.

3.2. The demand of reinstatement with backwages by the employee was opposed by the State Authorities by way of filing of reply before the Reference Court.

3.3. The Reference Court by judgment and award dated 13.10.2017 allowed the Reference in part and held that action of the State Authorities to terminate the services of each employee was illegal and therefore, he was reinstated on the post with continuity of service, however no back wages were granted to the employees.

3.4. The said judgment and award was challenged by the State Authorities as well as employees-workmen. The learned Single Judge by common judgment and order dated 5.11.2020 (Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bhargav D. Karia) whereas in one batch of appeals i.e. Letters Patent Appeal No. 1557 of 2022 and allied appeals, the learned Single Judge (Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Supehia) by order dated 15.09.2021 while confirming the order of Labour Court of reinstatement with continuity of service, partly allowed claim of the workmen-petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 4192 of 2019 by setting aside the subsequent action of State Authorities in engaging petitioners on piece rate wages. The learned Single Judge while passing the impugned order has relied upon the order dated 5.11.2020 passed in Special Civil Application No. 2767 of 2018. Hence, the appeals are taken up for hearing together and are decided by this common oral order. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid orders of learned Single Judge, the State Authorities have preferred the present group of Letters Patent Appeals.

4. Mr. Chaudhary, learned advocate for the employees-workmen has categorically stated that they have not challenged their dismissal by the learned Single Judge, by which, the order of the Reference Court/Tribunal of non-grant of backwages is upheld. Hence, consideration for this Court in this group of appeals is the validity of the order passed by the learned Single Judge qua confirming the reinstatement of each employee with continuity of service.

5. Mr. Sahil Trivedi, learned Assistant Government Pleader has vehemently submitted that the Tribunal as well as learned Single Judge has committed an error in accepting the case of employee that they have not worked for more than 240 days in each year. In absence of any evidence produced by the workmen, Mr. Trivedi submitted that it was the case of the appellant that they were appointed only for monsoon season to carry out certain works and thereafter they were not hired on daily wages. This aspect has not been properly considered by the Tribunal as well as learned Single Judge. By taking us to the reply filed in one of the Reference Case (LCS) No. 98 of 2005 (the same reply has been filed in each of the Reference), Mr. Trivedi, learned Assistant Government would submit that along with written statement extract of one of the person/employee was produced, which states that in the year