P SOUNDARARAJAN Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR SPICOT LTD , CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge in not granting backwages while setting aside the order of punishment imposed by the management on the ground that the conviction suffered at the hands of of the trial court, which was subsequently confirmed by the Appellate Court, was set aside by this Court in revision.

(2.) It transpires from the typed set of documents that the petitioner was working as Manager in the respondent institution. Whileso, in a private transaction between the appellant and a third party, a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was said to have been filed in which proceeding the appellant sustained conviction before the trial court, which was confirmed by the Appellate Court. On the same being taken up in revision before this Court, the said conviction was set aside. The learned single Judge, while setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant and directed reinstatement of the appellant, however declined to grant backwages against which the present appeal is preferred.

(3.) It is the contention of the appellant that while the learned single Judge had directed reinstatement of the petitioner/appellant on the ground that the conviction suffered by the appellant/petitioner was set aside in revision, however, has failed to order backwages, by virtue of the statutory provision under FR 54-A (3). Hence, in exercise of appellate jurisdiction, this Court has to rectify the error in the order passed by learned single Judge by ordering backwages as it thinks fit in the circumstances of the case. Learned senior counsel for the appellant placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in O.P.Gupta Vs Union of India & Ors., 1987 AIR(SC) 2257 to submit that it is necessary that while ordering reinstatement, it is necessary to make a specific order regarding the pay and allowances to be paid to the said individual for the period of absence from duty.