-'--{___
-
C.S. JOSHI
v.
INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KANPUR
AND ANR.
MARCH 21, 1997
[K. RAMASWAMY AND KT. THOMAS, JJ.)
Labour Law :
UP. Industlial Disputes Act, 1947:
S. 4-K-Removal from service-Reference to Labour Courr-Labour
Court making the award reinstating the workman with 50% 7'Jf back
wages-High Court passing a discretional)' order that 25% of back wages
would meet the ends of justice-Held, order of High Court being a discretion-
A
B
c
wy one, no useful purpose would be se1ved by funher remittance-Appeal D
dismissed.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2553 of
1997.
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.3.96 of the Allahabad High E
Court in C.M.W.P. No. 8196 of 1986.
Mrs. S. Janani for the Appellant.
Nikhil Nayyar for T.V.S.N. Chari for the Respondents.
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
F
Leave granted.
This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the learned
single Judge of the Allahabad High Court, made on March 29, 1996 in Civil G
Misc. Writ Petition No. 8106/86.
The appellant, while working as Lower Division Clerk, is said to have
fabricated the record and misappropriated the funds of the respondent
Institution. As a result show cause notice was issued and he was removed
from service. Subsequently, on a reference under Section 4-K of the U.P. H
333
334
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(1997] 3 S.C.R.
A Industrial Disputes Act, the Labour Court had in the award directed
reinstatement of the appellant with 50% of the back-wages. Thereon, the
respondent filed the writ petition. Similarly, the appellant also filed the writ
petition. Both the writ petitions came to have been decided on different
dates. The writ petition filed by the respondent-institution had come up in
B the first instance where the learned single judge, while maintaining the
order of reinstatement, ordered reducing the back-wages to 25%. When
the writ petition of the appellant had come up, the learned Judge directed
payment of 100% back-wages. The matter was carried in appeal to his
Court. This Court set side both the orders and remitted the matter for
reconsideration. After remand, the learned single judge considered the
C matter and restored the order passed by him on the writ petition filed by
the respondent-Management and dismissed the writ petition of the appel-
lant. Thus, this appeal by special leave.
The learned Judge felt it, in his discretion, to be expedient that 25%
of the back-wages would meet the ends of justice. It being a discretionary
D order, we think that no useful purpose would be served for further remit-
tance.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
R.P.
E
Appeal dismissed.
-
Lex