B. Suresh Kumar vs The Vigilance And Security ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4000 Tel

  THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                                 AND
           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

                                   W.A.No.940 of 2019

JUDGMENT:          (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)



        The present writ appeal is arising out of the order dated

06.11.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.17663 of

2011.

        The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the writ petition

was preferred by the appellant/writ petitioner being aggrieved by

the order of dismissal from service, which was affirmed by the

Labour Court, and a consent order has been passed by the learned

Single Judge.

        Paragraphs 4 and 6 of the order passed by the learned Single

Judge reads as under:-

        "4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing
        Counsel for the respondent-Corporation submits that similar issue

arose in WP.No.19950 of 2003 and this Court vide orders dated 3.8.2018 disposed of the said writ petition setting aside the order of removal of the petitioner therein and modifying the award of the Labour Court to the effect that the petitioner be reinstated into service as a fresh entrant without any back wages, continuity of service and other attendant benefits.

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of setting aside the order of removal of the petitioner dated 20.9.2002 and modifying the award of the Labour Court to the effect that petitioner be reinstated into service as a fresh entrant without any back wages, continuity of service and other attendant benefits. No costs. 3 Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed."

The aforesaid order makes it very clear that the learned

Single Judge has gone into the gravity of misconduct committed by

the employee and a lenient view was taken by the learned Single

Judge, only because of concession given by the learned counsel for

the respondent/Corporation. As it is a consent order passed in the

presence of both the parties, this court does not find any reason to

interfere in a writ appeal. No case for interference is made out in

the matter.

The writ appeal is dismissed.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

___________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

___________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J 30.11.2021 JSU