SUDHIR AGARWAL,J. - (1.) Heard Sri Abdul Moin, Advocate, for petitioner and Sri Asit Kumar Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Pratul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, for respondents in Writ Petition (SB) No. 1259 of 2010 (hereinafter referred to as "Employee's Writ Petition"); and, Sri Asit Kumar Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Pratul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, for petitioners and Sri Abdul Moin, Advocate, for respondents in Writ Petition (SB) No. 67 of 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "Employer's Writ Petition").
(2.) The Writ Petition (SB) No. 1259 of 2010 (Employee's Writ Petition) under Article 226 of Constitution has come up against judgment and order dated 05.09.2008 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") in Original Application (hereinafter referred to as 'O.A.') No. 40 of 2004 whereby Tribunal has allowed O.A. partly and setting aside punishment order of removal dated 30.09.2002, appellate order dated 09.06.2003 and revisional order dated 18.12.2003, it has directed respondents to reinstate petitioner in service with all consequential benefits except back wages. Petitioner, therefore, has challenged the aforesaid order only to the extent back wages have been denied to him.
(3.) Writ Petition (SB) No. 67 of 2009 (Employer's Writ Petition) is also directed against the same judgment and order dated 05.09.2008 and here employer-Union of India through General Manager, Central Railways, Bombay (hereinafter referred to as "Railway") has come up challenging the aforesaid judgment to the extent punishment, appellate and revisional orders have been set aside.;