- (1.) Heard counsel for the parties.
(2.) Petitioner herein has sought a review of the judgment dated 19.04.2008 passed in WPS No. 6618/2002 to the limited extent that the learned Single Judge while quashing the impugned orders dated 02.09.2002 and 14.11.2002 (Annexures - 4 and 9 therein) and also directing that the impugned orders would not be given effect to, however did not consider the 4 th prayer of the petitioner also recorded in the opening paragraph of the judgment itself, which relates to the direction to the respondents to pay to the petitioner the deducted wages for the period between 20.10.1997 to 21.12.1997 amounting to Rs. 19,900/ -.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned punishment orders were quashed by the learned Single Judge on the ground of failure to supply Inquiry Report or second show -cause notice. Learned Single Judge while quashing the impugned orders, was also pleased to direct the respondents to pay the amount of deducted wages for the period during which he was put under suspension, within one month from the date of the order. However, petitioner had also made a categorical prayer i.e. 4th prayer which relates to the deduction made for the period October 1997 to December 1997 in respect of which, petitioner had made a representation at Annexure -10 stating therein that the said charges had been dropped. This prayer however inadvertently has not been allowed by the learned Single Judge. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in such circumstances, petitioner has sought review of the order to the limited extent that the respondents may be directed to dispose of the petitioner's representation at Annexure -10 to the writ petition which relates to the 4th prayer.;