SANJIB BANERJEE,J. - (1.) The petitioner continues as an employee of the Calcutta Tramways Company (1978) Ltd. Following a disciplinary action being initiated against the petitioner, an order of punishment was passed on January 20, 2003 by demoting him in rank. The petitioner ultimately challenged the punishment in this Court and the order of punishment was set aside by an order of May 2, 2003, but it left the respondents free to consider the matter and award a lesser punishment.
(2.) At the time that the petition challenging the original order of punishment of January 20, 2003 was heard, the employer did not disclose to the Court that on account of the petitioner's failure to join his demoted post during the pendency of the first petition, by an order of March 29, 2003, the petitioner had been discharged from service with effect from March 4, 2003. The petitioner claims not to have had any notice or knowledge of such order of discharge and it was only upon the petitioner attempting to rejoin the services in accordance with the order of May 2, 2003 that the petitioner was informed by the employer that he stood discharged prior to the order May 2, 2003 being passed.
(3.) In the second of the petitions filed by the petitioner in this Court, the order of March 29, 2003 was challenged. The challenge was upheld on August 5, 2008 when this Court observed that it was improper on the part of the employer not to disclose the order of discharge at the time that the first writ petition was taken up for hearing. The order of discharge of March 29, 2003 was set aside on the ground that the proceedings were conducted behind the back of the petitioner and without notice to him. However, the order of August 5, 2008 did not provide for any back wages or salary for the petitioner or how the period between the earlier order of May 2, 2003 and the subsequent order of August 5, 2008 would be treated.;