V.K. Mohanan, J.

1. As the above two appeals are arising out of one and the same order dated 21.11.104 of the learned single Judge in I.A.No.11217/2014 in W.P.(C) No.32138/2013 and particularly, the question of law and the facts are identical, the above appeals are heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Writ Appeal No.1873/2014 is preferred at the instance of the workman, who is the 1st respondent in W.P.(C) No.32138/2013 and the petitioner in I.A.No.11217/2014 in the above writ petition; whereas W.A.No.1921/2014 is preferred by the management, who is the petitioner in the writ petition as well as the respondent in I.A.No.11217/2014. Short facts, which led to the impugned order are as follows:

3. The appellants in W.A.No.1873/2014 and W.A.No.1921/2014 are respectively the workman and the management. For the convenience, herein after they are referred to as the workman and management accordingly. A dispute arose between the workman and the management, which was brought to the Labour Court, Kozhikode under sub section 2 of Section 2A of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred for short as 'I.D. Act' only). According to the workman, he