JUDGMENT V.K. Khanna, J. - These are 36 connected writ petitions which relate to the employment of petitioners, who are serving in the life Insurance Corporation of India as Class III and Class IV employees. As the facts and questions of law involved in all the writ petitions are similar, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and respondents in all the writ petitions have made a statement that the writ petitions may be heard together as they are going to advance common arguments in all these writ petitions. The writ petitions have thus been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. Brief admitted facts relevant for the purposes of adjudicating the dispute in the present writ petitions are that the Life Insurance Corporation of India appointed the petitioners as Class III and Class IV employees for a fixed term ranging between 45 days to 85 days on a fixed pay and also obtained a declaration from that they had not been employed earlier at any office of the Life Insurance Corporation of India. 2. The main argument advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the appointment could not be terminated as the vacancies are still continuing and the Life Insurance Corporation has acted arbitrarily while terminating the appointment of the petitioner and is guilty of unfair labour practice. It has been contended that the Corporation has been adopting the practice of not filling the permanent vacancies and appointing persons only on a fixed term basis for a fixed period, which amounted to unfair labour practice. 3. The counsel appearing for the Life Insurance Corporation, however, urged that the fixed term appointments were made because of the pendency of the dispute before the National industrial Tribunal Bombay in Reference No. NTB-1 of 1987 in which an undertaking of the Management was recorded that the Management will not make any appointment from the open market. The Corporation was thus left with no option except to employ petitioners as fixed term employees. 4. For the purposes of deciding the questions raised in these connected writ petitions it will be useful to refer to the industrial disputes which have been referred to the National Industrial Tribunal, Bombay on two occasions. The Corporation was thus left with no option except to employ petitioners as fixed term employees. 4. For the purposes of deciding the questions raised in these connected writ petitions it will be useful to refer to the industrial disputes which have been referred to the National Industrial Tribunal, Bombay on two occasions. On the first occasion reference No. NTB-f of 1985 under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act was made to the following effect: "What should be the wages and other conditions of service of Badli, temporary and part time workmen of the Life Insurance Corporation India as well as the conditions of their absorption into regular cadre?" It may be pertinent to note that in the reference order the Central Zone National Life Insurance Employees Association, Kanpur was a party and after notices were issued by the Tribunal, the Unions of all most all the regions and the zones in the country were joined as parties and they put up their cases before the Tribunal. The contentions and claim of all the Unions were that the employees who have been working as part time. Badli and temporary work me and have been working for long period and artificially their continuous employment has been restricted to a maximum period of 85 days at a stretch. It was claimed by the Unions that all the workmen who have been doing Badli, temporary and part time work of the Corporation should be absorbed straightway. It appears that the Tribunal asked for suggestions from the Unions and the Corporation and the Tribunal proceeded to pass the award on the basis of the con census of the parties. The Tribunal fixed 85 days in a period of two years as a qualifying period for Class III employees and 70 days in a period of three years for Class IV employees, as being the minimum number of qualifying days for being absorbed. It was also prescribed in the award that all the workmen who had worked from 1-1-1982 to 1-1-1986 were to be eligible for absorption for counting the number of work days, the work done by them after the date of reference was to be ignored. The aforesaid award was given on 14th March, 1986. 5. It was also prescribed in the award that all the workmen who had worked from 1-1-1982 to 1-1-1986 were to be eligible for absorption for counting the number of work days, the work done by them after the date of reference was to be ignored. The aforesaid award was given on 14th March, 1986. 5. It appears that after the award dated 14th March, 1986 there arose certain difficulties in the implementation of the award and a dispute again arose between the workmen and the Corporation. Another dispute was referred by the Central Government in exercise of its powers under Section 36-A of the Industrial Disputes Act to the following effect: "Can the Award dated 17-4-1986 with special reference to paragraphs 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 54, 55, 56, 57, 60, 64 and 66 and the interim order dated 4-3-1986 he interpreted to mean that the Central Office of the Life Insurance Corporation of India is empowered to issue instructions/guidelines as contained in their circulars issued in this behalf to implement the directions of the Award. If not, what could be the correct interpretation of various directions covered by the said paragraphs in the circumstances of the case ? Whether the term absorption referred to at various places in the Award can be interpreted to mean recruitment ? It may be pertinent to note that during the pendency of the second reference before the National Industrial Tribunal an application was moved that the Corporation should not make regular appointments and an undertaking was given on behalf of the management that till the hearing and disposal of the reference the Management will not make any appointment from the open market. 6. According to the respondents case it is because of this undertaking that they could not make regular appointments and they had to make appointments for fixed period of exercise of their powers under clause 8 of the Lite Insurance Corporation of India (Stall) Regulations, 1960 (hereinafter described as the ("Regulations"). It has been urged that as all the workmen who were covered under the award had to be absorbed in view of the final decision given by the National Industrial Tribunal and in view of the undertaking which had been given by the Corporation, temporary arrangements had to be made for getting the day-to-day work of the corporation done by employing persons for a fixed period. 7. 7. In this connection the learned Counsel for the petitioners have, however, urged that this is only a camouflage and the Corporation has been adopting this practice of not filling the permanent vacancies and appointing persons only on a temporary basis for a fixed period which amounts to unfair labour practices. For judging whether the pleas set up by the Corporation are bona fide or not, it would be worthwhile to quote certain parts of the award given in reference No. NTB 1 of 1985 : "Having considered all aspects of the matter I think that for Class IV workmen, if they have worked for a total period of 70 days during a period of three calender years they should be considered as a eligible for being absorbed. Those who have worked for less than 70 days in any capacity and as any kind of workmen i.e., temporary, part time or badli, should not be eligible for consideration for absorption. With regard to Class III employees I am of the view that qualifying days should be 85 days in a period of two years. In other words for the Class III employees, if a person has worked for less than 85 days in a period of two calender years, he would not be eligible for being absorbed finally in the Corporations service, after passing the suitability consideration of the Screening Committee. So far as Class IV employees are concerned, qualifying period would be 70 days in a period of three years". "A regards guidelines to the Screening Committee it is not possible to lay down when a person can be considered as suitable or desirable Senior Officers with experience to form the Committee and can be trusted to apply the relevant considerations and tests. It should however be understood that the test is not for keeping people out, but to eliminate such who would in future pose problems in administration. It is obvious that in their cases the Corporations normal qualifications for eligibility are in applicable". "56. If the Screening Committee considers a workman to be undesirable or unsuitable, his name should be removed from the pool. He would not thereafter be entitled to any consideration for employment with the Corporation. It is obvious that in their cases the Corporations normal qualifications for eligibility are in applicable". "56. If the Screening Committee considers a workman to be undesirable or unsuitable, his name should be removed from the pool. He would not thereafter be entitled to any consideration for employment with the Corporation. The Screening Committee should publish and prepare a list according to seniority of concerned workmen who in its opinions in that zone division-wise are suitable for employment with the Corporation. Such workmen, according to their seniority should be absorbed against vacancies which existed with the Corporation as on 31-3-1985 and which may arise subsequently, until the list of accepted suitable candidates from the pools is exhausted. Till such time the lists are exhausted, the Corporation should not recruit outsiders in that particular division. Lists would be division-wise only though they may be prepared for the zone, as pointed out earlier, merely because there are more number of vacancies in one division than in the other, workmen who worked in a particular division or where they have worked will not be entitled to be considered against the vacancies which may be available in the other division." "58. It was stated before me that part time employees cannot altogether be done away with, considering the nature of work and its nonavailability for a full day. This institution therefore may have to be suffered for some more time. If possible, the corporation should consider and devise ways and means of converting part time, workmen into full timers by providing employment to them on full time basis. It was also stated that completely doing away with the temporary employment may not be possible for the corporation, as it has occasional temporary increase in the work. In the circumstances, temporary employment may have also to be continued. However, such temporary employment should not be for a period less than one month and should be from amongst the left over employees from the temporary pool and lists of selected workman by the Screening Committee." "59. After the Screening Committee has prepared lists of such suitable candidates and the Corporation has determined and fixed the number of posts and vacancies, which it has for purposes of being filled. After the Screening Committee has prepared lists of such suitable candidates and the Corporation has determined and fixed the number of posts and vacancies, which it has for purposes of being filled. If there is any excess of suitable candidates selected by the Screening Committee and included in the list, then they should be continued to be maintained in the pool for being employed for temporary purposes of the Corporation at a later stage. However, such a list should be confined, as far as possible to the minimum so that such unfortunate employees know clearly what are the prospects of their future absorption and should look after pastures elsewhere and not continue to hang on a remote possibility 01 future doubtful prospect of being absorbed in the corporations service." "60 In other words, entire process of selecting and finalising names of workmen for absorption against the existing and additional vacancies which the corporation may create or declare within this period should be over within a period of four or five months and selected workmen should be absorbed within a period of another one month i.e., in all within six months from the coming into force of this award." 8. As has been observed above, after the announcement of the first award because of the pendency of another dispute before the National Industrial Tribunal, the directions given in the first award were not implemented by the Corporation. The dispute referred for the second time before the National Industrial Tribunal was decided on 26th August, 1988 which was published in the Gazette of India dated 1st October, 1988. During the pendency of the second dispute, the corporation had given an undertaking that it will not make any appointment from the open market. This will also be borne out by the contents of Annexure-VI to the counter-affidavit filed by Sri S.K. Bajpai. During the pendency of the second dispute, the corporation had given an undertaking that it will not make any appointment from the open market. This will also be borne out by the contents of Annexure-VI to the counter-affidavit filed by Sri S.K. Bajpai. In this letter dated 5th August, 1988 it has been specifically stated that in view of the pendency of the dispute before the Tribunal no appointment can be made from the open market and thus fixed term appointments be made for not more than 85 days, It may be mentioned here that the letter specified that the appointments may not be made for more than 85 days in view of the fact that the earlier Tribunal in its first award had given a right to those workmen to be permanently absorbed to those workmen who had worked for 85 days. The idea was that the petitioners and other employees who were being given fixed term employment may not raise a dispute again that they has a right to be finally absorbed in view of what has been laid down in the first award regarding certain employees of the Corporation. The corporation rightly wanted to avoid that situation as the absorption on the vacant permanent post had to be done in accordance with the directions given in the first and second award and till then in view of the undertaking the posts had to be kept vacant and could not be allowed to be filled by the petitioners and other similarly situated employees. The petitioner's case, therefore, that the action of the corporation was either arbitrary or the corporation practised unfair labour practice cannot be accepted. 9. It has been argued that even after the second award the Corporation is still employing persons on fixed tenor basis and has not made regular appointments in accordance with the Stall' Regulations. A bare perusal of the two awards given by the National Industrial would show that a period of six mouths was given for finally absorbing the workers covered by those awards. The last awards, has been given on 1st October, 1988 and the Corporation will have to comply with the directions given by the National Industrial Tribunal by 31st March, 1989. The Corporation will thus be justified in making temporary appointments in exercise of their powers under clause 8 till the process of final absorption is finished. The last awards, has been given on 1st October, 1988 and the Corporation will have to comply with the directions given by the National Industrial Tribunal by 31st March, 1989. The Corporation will thus be justified in making temporary appointments in exercise of their powers under clause 8 till the process of final absorption is finished. In case the Corporation even after the final absorption goes on making such appointment under clause 8 for the remaining vacancies than at that stage it may be open to the petitioners to challenge the action of the Corporation on that grounds. At the present moment there is no material before us on the basis of which we can say that the action of the Corporation is either arbitrary or they are practising unfair labour practice. The sequence of events clearly show that this is because of the pendency of the dispute before the National Industrial Tribunal and the undertaking given by the Corporation which we have held to be bona fide and that the Corporation had no alternative except to exercise its powers under clause 8 of the Stall Regulations. 10. In the end it has been argued that the Corporation is not even following the directions which had been given in Annexure "6" to the counter-affidavit filed by Sri S.K. Bajpai. The precise arguments is in connection with clause (5) of the aforesaid confidential circular. Learned Counsel for the Corporation has stated that the Corporation will follow all the conditions laid down in circular contained in Annexure "6". In view of the aforesaid statement it is not necessary for us to pass any orders in this connection. 11. No other point has been pressed before us. 12. For the reasons stated above, the writ petitions failed and are dismissed. It is being made clear that some of the petitioners have been able to continue in service in view of the interim orders passed by this Court. As the contention raised by the petitioners have failed, it is being made clear that the period during which the petitioners have continued in service on the basis of the interim order passed by this Court will not give them any benefit for the purposes of laying any claim for being absorbed in permanent employment of the Corporation.