- (1.) VIDE this writ petition, the petitioner-Bank is challenging the award of the Labour Court dated 10. 6. 1998 vide which the application under Section 33 (C) (2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act) was partly allowed in favour of respondent No. 1.
(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1 was in the service of the petitioner-Bank. He remained absent from his duties with effect from 24. 8. 1992. He was charge-sheeted for the unauthorised absence from duty. After this reply to the charge-sheet was found unsatisfactory, a departmental enquiry was initialed against him. Enquiry Officer was also appointed. On 16. 10. 1993 respondent No. 1 tendered his resignation with a request to accept the same by deducting one month's salary in lieu of notice and his. resignation was accepted vide order dated 26. 10. 1993.
(3.) DURING this period, respondent No. 1 gave an application to the petitioner that he desired to join duty. This application is at Ex. A7 dated 1. 12. 1992. However, he was to allowed to join duty presumably because of the pendency of the enquiry proceedings. The question in this case is regarding pay from 1. 12. 1992 upto July, 1993 only-Though the respondent No. I was not allowed to join the duty, he was not placed under suspension. The Labour Court held that the period after 30. 11. 1992 till July, 1993 is to be treated as the one spent on duty and that he cannot be treated as absent during the above period.;