- (1.) THOUGH , the matter has been listed from the defect side and the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 72 days in filing of this appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, we have examined the matter on the merits with the consent of both the parties as the Respondent has also appeared before this Court in pursuance of the notice issued on the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
(2.) THE writ petition was preferred by the Respondent challenging the action of the Appellants of having deducted the amount of Rs. 65,000/ - from the retiral benefits. The said amount was deducted as the Appellants were of the opinion that the Respondent has failed to recover the said amount towards dues to the Appellant on account of the bills which were raised, but the amount was not received. The principal submission which found favour with the learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition was that the Appellants could not have deducted the amount from the retiral benefits without having held an inquiry regarding liability of the Respondent and the learned Single Judge has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gorakhpur University and Ors. v. Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra reported in : (2001) 6 SCC 591.
(3.) IT is not in dispute that pending this appeal the amount of Rs. 65,000/ -, which had been deducted by the Appellants, has already been refunded and paid to the Respondent by the Appellants.;