JUDGMENT This order shall also govern the disposal of Miscellaneous Petition No. 4158 of 1989 (Anil Kumar Tiwari v. M.P. Pradushan Nivaran Mandal & ors.) The petitioners were working in the employment of the respondents as Laboratory Attendants, whose services were terminated, vide order dated 5.7.1989. It is not in dispute that the petitioners have completed 240 days of continuous service. It is also not in dispute that the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (for short the 'Act') apply. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that without going into various grounds raised in the petitions the order of termination deserve to be quashed as it has been passed without complying the pre-requisites of section 25-F of the Act, as neither the retrenchment compensation nor the notice pay was paid to the petitioners, an unreported Division Bench decision of this Court in M.P. No. 550/90 (Ashok Kumar Gupta v. Madhya Pradesh Pradooshan Niwaran Mandal & another) decided on 23.9.91 at Gwalior Bench, to which I was a member was relied upon it. Learned counsel also submitted that in the petitions the petitioners also seek regularisation of service, as all the petitioners are continuously working on the vacant posts. Shri Mohan Tamaskar, learned counsel for the respondents could not satisfy this Court to the fact whether the conditions of section 25-F of the Act were complied with. However, it was submitted by Shri Mohan Tamaskar that in case this Court quashes the order of termination of the petitioners back wages be not awarded. An regards regularisation of service, it was submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to be regularised as there are other employees in queue. After hearing counsel, I am of the opinion that the orders of termination of service cannot be sustained as violative of section 25-F of the Act and are non-est; as held in case of Ashok Kumar Gupta (supra). As regards the second grievance of the petitioners that the petitioners have rendered continuous service on clear vacant posts, therefore, they deserve to be regularised. For that the petitioners may make a representation within a period of two months on that the respondents shall take a decision in accordance with law within a period of two months thereafter and shall fill up the vacant posts in accordance with Rules. For that the petitioners may make a representation within a period of two months on that the respondents shall take a decision in accordance with law within a period of two months thereafter and shall fill up the vacant posts in accordance with Rules. In view of the fact that the order of termination of the petitioners are void in the eye of law, the petitioners shall be deemed to continue in their employment and shall be entitled to all ancillary benefits. The question of payment of back wages does not arise as the petitioners are continuing in service in pursuance of the interim order of this Court dated 28.7.1989. However, it is made clear that if the petitioners have not worked for certain period, for that the petitioners shall not be entitled to any pay as the petitioners who are industrial workmen have directly approached this Court, in writ jurisdiction. In the result, the petitions are allowed in the manner aforesaid, the orders of termination of services of the petitioners are quashed, the petitioners shall be deemed to continue in their employment. Parties to bear their own costs. Security amount, if any, be refunded to the petitioners. No costs.