- (1.) The appellant has brought in challenge a remand order passed by the division Bench of the High Court in proceedings arising out of his earlier removal from service of the respondent Corporation. The appellant was at the relevant time working as a conductor on a bus of the respondent Corporation. He was alleged to have committed misconduct for which he was charge-sheeted on 31/12/1984 by being placed under suspension. After the departmental enquiry he was removed from service by an order dated 9/7/1985. He raised an industrial dispute which came to be adjudicated upon by the Additional Industrial Tribunal-cum-Additional Labour Court, Hyderabad. The Labour Court held that the enquiry conducted by the Corporation was vitiated. It, therefore, granted liberty to the respondent to lead evidence to justify its action against the appellant. After the evidence was led, the Labour court found that out of the three charges levelled against him Charge 3 was not established, but on his own admission the other two charges were established The Labour Court in the light of the finding reached by it held, by award dated 20/8/1992, that the appellant may be reinstated with continuity of service but with 50% back wages only. The said award resulted in two cross writ petitions before the High Court. The respondent corporation filed Writ Petition No. 7686 of 1993 challenging the order of reinstatement. The appellant in his turn in quest of 100% back wages filed writ Petition No. 1465 of 1995.
(2.) A learned Single Judge of the High Court heard both the writ petitions together and came to the conclusion that there was no case for interfering with the reinstatement as ordered by the Labour Court. Consequently, the respondent Corporation's writ petition being Writ Petition No. 7686 of 1993 was dismissed. So far as the writ petition filed by the appellant was concerned, it was allowed and 100% back wages were ordered to be granted to him.
(3.) The respondent Corporation being aggrieved by the decision of 100% back wages as ordered by the learned Single Judge filed Writ Appeal No. 883 of 1995. The said appeal was allowed by the impugned judgment of the division Bench of the High Court and the proceedings were remanded to the labour Court for fresh hearing and for deciding whether any back wages could be granted to the appellant and whether he was gainfully employed when the order of removal was operating against him and also for deciding whether reinstatement could have been granted.;