- (1.) These two appeals under Clause X of the Letters Patent are directed against a common judgment dated 08.07.2010 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that the services of a confirmed employee cannot be terminated without holding departmental inquiry. The learned Single Judge has recorded following conclusion in the last two paras of the judgment, which reads thus:- "On consideration, I find force in the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Once it is admitted that as per the instructions issued by the Registrar, and Rules framed adopting the instructions of the Registrar, otherwise also as per the principles of natural justice, which an employer was required to follow, were not adopted, and that the impugned order of dismissal was passed without holding any departmental enquiry, and that the Society took into consideration certain allegations qua which even notice was not issued. The impugned orders cannot be sustained, being arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, as also the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned orders are set aside, and a writ in the nature of mandamus is issued to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits of service. However, it shall be open to the employer to proceed with further enquiry, in case, it so desire to punish the petitioner for the misconduct alleged, by following procedure of law as contained in the statutory rules."
(2.) A perusal of the aforesaid finding would show that the order of dismissal of the writ petitioner-respondents(s) have been passed without following the procedure established by law. The learned Single Judge has gone to the extent of observing in the earlier para of the judgment that even if there is no rule or instructions, some method satisfying the requirement of Article 14 of the Constitution has to be devised.
(3.) When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 08.03.2011, learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the Letters Patent Bench may consider only one question by restricting the grant of benefits of pension and pensionary dues. It was also submitted that the back wages from the date of dismissal till the date of retirement of the writ petitioner-respondents(s) may not be ordered. On that basis we had issued notice of motion.;