Judgment

K.N. SAIKIA, J.- This analogous cluster of seventeen appeals by special leave, and a special leave petition involves a common question of law though they arise out of the following respective facts:

CA. Nos. 3241-3248 of 1981

These eight appeals by the Land Development and Reclamation Corporation, Chandigarh are from the judgment and order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissing its writ petitions challenging the award dated August 2, 1980 of the Labour Court, Chandigarh holding that the respondents were entitled to reinstatement with back wages except Yaspal (C.A No. 3242 of 1981) who was to get wages up to October 10, 1978, with benefits of continuity of service. The respondents were workmen under the management of the Corporation and their services were terminated on the ground that the Chairman had no power to appoint them. The Labour Court in its award held that their services were terminated illegally without payment of retrenchment compensation under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as the Act, and that they were entitled to reinstatement.

CA. No. 686(NL) of 1982

2. This appeal is from the judgment dated November 9, 1981 of the High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench). The first respondent was an employee of the appellants corporation since 1972. He was taken on probation in 1975 for one year which was extended from time to time, lastly from September 1, 1977 to October 31, 1977, whereafter his services being not found satisfactory were terminated with effect from November 1, 1977 under Regulation 44(b) of the State Transport Employees Service Regulations of the Corporation. The Labour Court took the view that it amounted to retrenchment and the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act having not been complied with the termination was illegal. The appellants writ petition therefrom was dismissed.

C.A. No. 1817 of 1982

3. The respondent workman was employed by the appellant Bank on October 3, 1962 as a clerk and he was put on probation for six months. As allegedly there was total lack of confidence of the bank in the employee it terminated his service on July 27, 1974 on payment of three months salary. The Industrial Tribunal by its award dated December 3, 1981 directed reinstatement of the workman with full back wages on the ground of non-compliance with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act. The employer Bank now appeals from that award.

C.A. No. 1898 of 1982

4. Respondents 2-6 were employed on probation by the appellant a partnership firm on June 12, 1975. Respondents 2-5 assaulted a supervisor and being afraid of police remained absent from March 29, 1976 and abandoned their jobs and their services were terminated. Respondent 6 stopped attending duties from August 9, 1975 and he left the service of his own accord. The Labour Court by its award dated September 16, 1980 held that their termination amounted to retrenchment and was illegal for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 25-F of the Act and they were entitled to reinstatement with full back wages. The managements writ petition challenging the award having been unsuccessful, it has appealed.

C.A. No. 3261 of 1982

5. Respondent Namdeo was a clerk under the appellant Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. Pursuant to a disciplinary proceeding his service was terminated with effect from April 23, 1963 by giving him one months salary in lieu of notice. Moved by the respondent, the Assistant Commissioner under Section 16 of the C.P. and Berar Industrial Disputes Settlement Act, 1947 held the inquiry proceeding to be an empty paper formality and the termination amounted to dismissal and accordingly he set aside the order and directed the corporation to reinstate and pay him his back wages amounting to Rs 15,971.66 within one month. The Corporation having moved the State Industrial Court at Nagpur under Section 16(5) of the Settlement Act, that court by its order dated September 29, 1973 allowed the applic