The only question which falls for companysideration in this appeal at the instance of the Director, State Transport, Punjab and another is as to whether the High Court was justified in taking the view that the order of dismissal as passed by the Labour Court on inquiry held before it related back to the dale of the original order of dismissal passed by the Management or operated prospectively from the date of the order of the Labour Court.
It was held by the Labour Court ultimately on the basis of the evidence led before it that Respondent 1 was number entitled to any relief and the action of the appellants was justified in terminating his services on the ground of serious misconduct of embezzlement of funds of the appellant State.
After a domestic inquiry the appellants terminated the services of Respondent 1 workman who was at the relevant time, working as a companyductor on one of the buses belonging to the appellants.
The termination order was challenged by Respondent 1 before the Labour Court.
The Labour Court found that the domestic inquiry was defective.
Respondent 1 thereafter carried the matter to the High Court by way of a writ petition.
It therefore, permitted the appellants to lead evidence to justify their action.
A few relevant facts relating to this appeal may be numbered at the outset.
