BALBIR SINGH Vs. THE KURUKSHETRA CENTRAL CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This letter patent appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated Jan. 18, 1989. The appellant-petitioner was appointed as a clerk in the respondent-bank on temporary ad hoc basis for a period of 89 days vide appointment letter dated 19/21.5.1986 and he joined as such on May 21, 1986. The petitioner continued to be in the employment of the respondent-bank upto Aug. 22, 1987 with national breaks. The petitioner consequently sought the relief from this court in a writ petition for a direction that he was entitled to continue in service. The writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge. It was held that the termination of the petitioner was illegal. It was also directed that he be reinstated in service and a further direction was issued by the Single Judge that the petitioner shall not be entitled for the back salary for the period he remained out of the employment of the Bank.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by this direction of the learned Single Judge and consequently, the present appeal has been filed in this Court.

(3.) The case of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the learned single Judge having held that the respondent-bank's refusal to take work from the petitioner, being illegal, he was entitled to be reinstated and he has been in fact reinstated. The counsel for the petitioner urged that once he has been reinstated, he was also entitled to back salary for the period he remained out of the employment of the Bank.