S. Siri Jagan, J.

1. The management in two industrial disputes namely ID Nos. 17/07 and 35/08 before the Labour Court, Ernakulam is the petitioner in these two writ petitions. They are challenging Ext.P7 common award passed by the Labour Court, Ernakulam in those IDs. Although two separate industrial disputes were referred for adjudication essentially the issue involved in both is the same, which is more succistinctly stated in the issue referred for adjudication in I.D. No.17/07 which reads as follows:

"whether the management of Deshabhimani has legally terminated the service of Sri.Appukkuttan Vallikkunnu by paying gratuity as the only terminal benefits? If not, what relief available to him for the period of the alleged denial of employment till his date of retirement? "

2. The workman was an employee of the management which is a well known daily newspaper in the State of Kerala by name 'Desabhimani'. The newspaper is owned by one of the most prominent political parties in the country, particularly in Kerala by name Communist Party of India (Marxist). The workman was a member of that political party and the Associate Editor of the daily. During July to September he was on leave for undergoing ayurvedic treatment. He rejoined duty after leave on 08.09.98, According to the workman, on that day, after the newspaper for the next day was printed, the news of the death of one of the prominent leaders of the said political party was reported. Therefore, the petitioner took steps to reprint the city edition of the daily on that day including the said news also. But when he returned to his seat, the workman found that his name board has been removed from his cabin. According to the workman, the General Manager of the newspaper called him to his room and directed him not to report for duty thereafter, until the political party takes a decision regarding his reinstatement in the party, since he has been expelled from the party. The workman would contend that the General manager promised that the workman would be paid his salary every month. Petitioner was paid salary for the month of September and October also. But thereafter payment of salary was stopped. Although the workman demanded payment of salary and to continue to discharge his duties, he was not either reinstated nor was he paid any salary. Attempt at mediation by a member of the State Committee of the political party did not also result in any acceptable settlement. In the meanwhile, another person was appointed as Associate Editor of the daily in the place of workman without referring to the workman's name in the appointment order. Although the workman again took up the matter with Central leadership of the political party, ultimately nothing resulted in his favour. His expulsion from the party as well as the daily was prominently reported in all newspapers. Those reports portraits, the political party as harassing the workman without any reason, only because of the differences of opinion between the workman and the state leadership of the political party. In an attempt to indicate their stand, the daily came out with a press release explaining the reasons for expelling the workman from his post in the newspaper establishment. The workman raised an industrial dispute, which was originally referred for adjudication under the Industrial Dispute Act with a vague issue. Writ petitions were filed. It is not necessary to go into all those details for the purpose of these writ petitions, since ultimately these two industrial disputes were referred for adjudication to the Labour Court, Ernakulam. It may also be mentioned here that originally ID No. 17/07 was ID No. 1/11 before the Labour Court, Kollam, an award was passed in that ID by Labour Court, Kollam which was setaside by this court and remanded for fresh consideration, thereafter both the industrial disputes were referred to the Labour Court, Ernakulam together and the Labour Court Ernakulam re- numbered ID No.1/11 of