- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) In this case on 08.11.2010 arguments were heard and judgment was reserved. The said order is quoted below: Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Judgment reserved. Duplicate copy of the supplementary counter affidavit has been supplied bylearned Counsel for workman Respondent. It has been stated that FIR was lodged against three other employees of the Bank, i.e. Sri A.K. Madan, Sri Sanjeev Kumar and Sri Amar Nath. Learned Counsel for the Bank, Petitioner states that this FIR was lodged by Hari Shanker Yadav, who complained that his money was swindled. Learned Counsel for both the parties may file short written arguments. Learned Counsel for the workman Respondent in his written arguments shall indicate the fate of the criminal case, which was initiated on the basis of FIR and if some order/ judgment has been passed, then certified copy of the same shall be annexed therewith. Learned Counsel for both the parties before submitting written arguments shall supply copy of the same to the learned Counsel for the other side. Arguments may be filed within two weeks.
(3.) This writ petition is directed against award dated 17.12.1997 given by Presiding Officer Central Government Industrial Tribunal, cum labour court, Kanpur in Industrial Dispute No. 111 of 1995. The matter which was referred to the labour court was as to whether the action of Petitioner employer terminating the services of its workman Respondent No. 3 A.K. Saxena w.e.f. 02.07.1993 was just and valid or not. The Tribunal directed reinstatement with back wages.;