INDIAN BANK Vs. S MAHESWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant/Bank has preferred the instant Writ Appeals before this Court as against the common order dated 11.01.2011 passed by the Learned Single Judge in dismissing and allowing the Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos.16490 of 1997 & 17493 of 1998 respectively.

(2.) The Learned counsel for the Appellant/Bank (in both the Writ Appeals) submits that the Learned Single Judge should have allowed the W.P.No.16490 of 1997 filed by the Appellant/Bank and dismissed the W.P.No.17493 of 1998 filed by the First Respondent/Petitioner.

(3.) According to the Learned counsel for the Appellant/Bank, the Learned Single Judge had committed an error in reversing the award of the Second Respondent/Industrial Tribunal in I.D.No.105 of 1992 from 'Reinstatement without Continuity of Service' and it is also represented on behalf of the Appellant/Bank that the Learned Single Judge ought to have held that the Second Respondent/Industrial Tribunal having justified the action of the Appellant/Bank should not have ordered reinstatement without continuity of service and backwages on humanitarian ground and instead should have allowed the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant/Bank.