- (1.) Delay in filing the counter-affidavit is condoned.
(2.) Leave granted.
(3.) The order of the learned single Judge of the High Court of Karnataka on the writ petition filed by the first respondent-workman reads, so far as is relevant, thus: "The misconduct alleged against the worker is that he has closed the line room allotted for the use of labourers as Reading Room and prevented the workers from using it. Though he was instructed by the Conductor Mr. T. K. Poovanna as also the Management to keep the Reading Room open, he has declined to keep it open. This is a serious lapse on the part of the worker for which a proper punishment can be imposed. The Management has, therefore, thought it fit to dismiss the worker. One cannot say that the Management is totally unjustified in doing so. But whatever be the circumstances, I feel it to be harsh. I do not think the extreme punishment of dismissal is just and proper in the instant case. May be the misconduct committed by the worker may be a serious lapse, but it does not warrant the extreme punishment of dismissal. ********** In the result, the worker will be reinstated into service with backwages only from 17-1-1996, the date of award. The writ petition is disposed of as above." The Division Bench, in the appeal filed by the present appellant, declined to interfere.;