N V SUBBARAO Vs. CORPORATION BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Heard Mr. Roy Abraham, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned Counsel for the respondents. We have perused order impugned in this appeal. The learned Counsel appearing for the Corporation Bank submitted before the High Court that the Management had decided to revert the appellant to the lowest post of clerk by revising impugned order of dismissal. For the said proposal, the counsel for the respondent-employee had also submitted before the High Court that the employee was agreeable to accept the punishment of reversal to the lower post. In view of the submission made as above, the High Court has not gone into the merits of the case and disposed of the same on the said submissions. On the basis of the above order passed by the High Court, the appellant herein was reinstated as a clerk on 6.2.1997. The grievance of the appellant is that he was not given any benefit to the post in question namely the clerk from the date of suspension up to the date of reinstatement.

(3.) When the special leave petition came before this Court for admission, this Court on 19.12.2003, after condoning the delay, issued notice to the respondent-Bank. On 3.4.2006, this Court passed the following order: