The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of a workman to full back wages, continuity of service, seniority, promotion, and revision of pay scale following reinstatement, as per the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and relevant case law.

R.K. Agrawal, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 181 of 1995 has been filed by U. P. State Electricity Board through Kanpur Electricity Supply Administration, Kanpur seeking a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 12th September, 1994/19th September 1994 passed by the Labour Court I, U. P., Kanpur in Misc. Case No. 28 of 1994, filed as Annexure 9 to the writ petition and other consequential relief's. Vide order dated 12th September, 1994/19th September, 1994, the labour court has allowed the application for review filed by Arvind Kumar Tiwari, Respondent No. 2 and after setting aside the order dated 1st September, 1994, has directed the Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 2,56,498.50 paise being the amount of back wages for the period 6th March, 1982 to 31st July, 1993, pursuant to the order of reinstatement.

2. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 10591 of 2004 has been filed by Kanpur Electricity Supply Company Limited, through its Managing Director, KESCO, Kanpur seeking a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the award dated 21st May, 2003 passed by the Labour Court, I, U. P., Kanpur, Respondent No. 1, which has been published on 23rd August, 2003, filed as Annexure 7 to the writ petition and other consequential relief's. By means of the aforesaid award, the labour court had held that Arvin Kumar Tiwari, Respondent No. 2, is entitled for back wages, revision of pay scale from 8th April, 1980 as also seniority and promotion to the post of the J.S.D. from the date when his juniors have been promoted, pursuant to the order dated 14th May, 1993 passed by this Court directing for reinstatement of the Respondent No. 2.

3. Since in both the writ petitions the order passed by the labour court, pursuant to the judgment and order dated 14th May, 1993 relating to the same workman, is the subject matter, both the writ petitions have been heard together and are being decided by the common judgment.

4. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to both these writ petitions are as follows:

Arvind Kumar Tiwari, Respondent No. 2 was appointed on 8th April, 1980 on the post of the Clerk for preparation of electricity bills in Kanpur Electric Supply Administration. His service was terminated on 6th March, 1981. He raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the labour court for adjudication by the State Government, vide reference dated 19th June, 1982. The labour court, vide award dated 27th July, 1983, upheld the order of termination. The award dated 27th July 1983 was challenged by Arvind Kumar Tiwari by means of the Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15316 of 1983 before this Court. This Court, vide judgment and order dated 14th May 1993, found that the workman had worked for more than 240 days, thus, he is entitled to be reinstated because the procedure u/s 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was not followed and the award of the labour court is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, this Court while allowing the writ petition, quashed the award of the labour court with the following directions:

Allowing this writ petition I hereby quash the award of the labour court whereby the industrial dispute raised by the Petitioner was dismissed. By a writ of mandamus I direct that the Petitioner shall be reinstated as workman within two months from the date of supply of a certified copy of this judgment by the Petitioner before the Respondents. From the date of reinstatement the Petitioner shall be entitled to receive wages as are admissible to him under rules. Since the Respondents have not appeared, therefore, there will be no order as to costs.

5. In compliance of the aforesaid judgment of this Court, the present Petitioner reinstated the workman, Respondent No. 2, as daily rated clerk in G.P. F. cell under the Deputy Chief Accounts Officer, Kesa house, Kanpur, vide order dated 7th September, 1993. However, the Petitioner did not pay the back wages. The R