Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge.

Since common questions of law and facts are involved in all these petitions, the same were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by a common judgment. However, in order to maintain clarity, facts of CWP No. 4354 of 2009 have been taken into consideration.

2. The workmen through their association, i.e. Irrigation and Public Health Workers’ Union, Sundernagar filed reference No. 59 of 1994. Presiding Judge, Labour Court vide award dated 12.12.1996 partly allowed the same by allowing demand No.1. The other demands were rejected.

3. It is evident from the record that respondent-State had sought permission of the Labour Court to retrench the petitioner and other co-workmen on 22.10.1994 and 25.10.1994. Order dated 22.10.1994 is on record at page 44 of the paper book. The workmen had filed application under section 33-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 before the Labour Court on 18.3.1995 against their retrenchment. Labour Court vide judgment dated 3.1.1996 dismissed the application. The question of “last come first go” was taken into consideration qua the workmen, namely, Bhim Singh and Hem Singh. These two workmen had also obt