Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.

1. As identical questions of law and facts are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the above indicated writ petitions, arising out of the same impugned award, by means of this common judgment, in order to avoid the repetition. However, the relevant facts, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant writ petitions, have been extracted from 2nd Civil Writ Petition No. 2634 of 1992 titled as "Ashok Kumar Mehta v. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bathinda and another" in this regard.

2. Concisely, the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for Civil Writ Petition Nos. 18176 of 1991 & 2634 of 1992 2 disposal of the present writ petitions and emanating from the record, are that Ashok Kumar Mehta, workman was appointed and was working as a Field Assistant in the year 1981, with Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation (for brevity "the Mark- fed"). In the wake of heavy rains during the course of harvesting season of Rabi crops, the respective Governments had taken a decision to purchase the entire stock of rain affected wheat, at the fixed rates from th