- (1.) INSTANT appeal has been preferred against interim order passed by learned Single Judge in the pending writ petition dt. 15.10.2014.
(2.) THE brief facts which are relevant for disposal of the instant intra -court appeal are that the respondent workman was initially appointed as Clerk -cum -Typist on 15.10.1992 on daily wages basis and worked upto 30.04.1994 and his services were terminated w.e.f. 01.05.1994 and that came to be challenged by raising an industrial dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ("Act, 1947") and after hearing the parties the learned Tribunal answered the reference & while holding the action of the appellant to be in violation of Sec. 25F of the Act, 1947 but in lieu of reinstatement awarded compensation of Rs. 15,000/ - vide its Award dt. 28.04.1998 and that came to be challenged before the learned Single Judge in a writ petition at the instance of the respondent workman and that finally came to be allowed holding that he was entitled for reinstatement with continuity of service with 50% back wages, vide order dt. 15.01.2003 and that was assailed by filing special appeal at the instance of the present appellant and initially the order in respect to reinstatement passed by the learned Single Judge dt. 15.01.2003 was made subject to final decision of the pending appeal and as regards 50% back wages to that extent it was kept in abeyance. However, the special appeal was finally decided vide order dt. 19.07.2006 and it was observed that since the employee has been reinstated on the basis of interim order, his reinstatement was confirmed but the order of the learned Single Judge in respect of 50% back wages dt. 15.01.2003 to that extent it was set aside. However, his services again came to be terminated vide order dt. 31.05.2007 and it was pleaded by the appellant employer and as alleged that it was after due compliance of Sec. 25F of the Act, 1947 and that became the subject matter of challenge in writ petition No. 5147/2007 in which there was no stay granted by the learned Single Judge but the respondent workman was reinstated pending writ petition vide order dt. 09.07.2009 keeping the rights of the employer reserved pending final decision/outcome of the writ petition No. 5147/2007. After the workman was reinstated pending writ petition No. 5147/2007 without prejudice to their rights, application was filed seeking amendment in the writ petition and prayed that he may be granted continuity in service, regular pay -scale, arrears from 10.04.2009 and that amendment application was opposed by the appellant but the learned Single Judge after hearing the parties allowed the amendment application vide its order dt. 11.12.2012 and that was again the subject matter of challenge at the instance of the present appellant by filing D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 346/2013 which came to be dismissed by the Division Bench by a detailed order with cost of Rs. 5,000/ -dt. 18.04.2013.
(3.) THE appellant thereafter again terminated services of the respondent workman as alleged after due compliance of Sec. 25F of the Act, 1947 vide order dt. 21.02.2014 and since order was passed pending writ petition, apart from stay application, the respondent workman filed second application seeking amendment in the writ petition assailing subsequent order of termination dt. 21.02.2014 and that application came to be allowed vide order dt. 18.08.2014 which was again made a subject matter of challenge at the instance of the present appellant by filing D.B. Special Appeal No. 1478/2014 and that came to be dismissed vide order dt. 07.10.2014.;