Satyabrata Sinha, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated September 4, 1998 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder the writ application filed by the petitioner was allowed.
(2.) The fact of the matter shortly stated is as follows: The first respondent was discharged from services by the appellant with effect from January 24, 1971 on the ground that he was absent for more than 14 consecutive days. He raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Industrial Tribunal by the appropriate Government for adjudication on the following; - 1. Whether the termination of service of Shri Tarak Nath Sengupta, Junior Assistant, Est. No. 309 was justified? 2. What relief, if any is he entitled to?
(3.) By an award dated December 21, 1993 the learned Tribunal answered the reference in favour of the management and against the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent field a writ application before this Court which was marked as C.R. No. 5070(W) of 1984. sUSANTA CHATTERJEE. J. by an order dated August 8, 1990 allowed the said writ application, inter alia, commanding the appellant herein to reinstate the 1st respondent within six weeks from the date of communication of the order and further directed that he would be entitled to the benefits of the continuity of service but would not get any back wages from 1971 till date of his joining. It was, however, made clear that the 1st respondent would be entitled to get retirement and other benefits as if he is in continuous service. The said order was passed ex parte. An application for recalling was filed but the same had been dismissed by the learned Judge by an order dated December 15, 1993. A further direction was issued that the 1 st respondent would be permitted to join and he would be entitled to all back wages in terms of the earlier judgment i.e. from August 8, 1990.;