D.K.Seth, J. - (1.) The petitioner's services having been terminated, an appeal was preferred against the order of termination. The said appeal was decided ex parte by order dated 15-10-1986 copy whereof was received by the petitioner on 21-5-1988. By an application dated 17-6-1988, the petitioner prayed for reconsidering the appeal on the grounds mentioned in the said application.
(2.) Mr. S.R. Roy, learned counsel holding the brief of Shri T. Nath submits that there is no provision for review under the U. P. Employee Federal Authority (Business) Regulation, 1976 (hereinafter called as the Regulation). He further opposes the writ petition on the ground that even on merits, the said application for review which is contained as Annexure-5 to the writ petition does not make out any case for review. According to him even if the application is treated to be an application for recalling the ex pane order then sign the grounds disclosed do not make out a case for recalling. Therefore, according to him the writ petition does not merit consideration.
(3.) Mr. H. N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner on the other hand concends that though in the application a prayer for review was made but the same was in effect was for recalling the ex parte order and not tin application for review. He lies pointed out to the ground No. 2 of the said application and contended that on compassionate ground, the said application for recall should have been allowed since the petitioner was not being paid his salary for a long time and therefore he was unable to travel to Lucknow for the purpose of pursuing the appeal.;