1. This writ petition is directed against the order in Application No.7238/2011 dated 12.9.2013, whereby the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore, has rejected the application of the petitioner consequential benefits like arrears of salary, increments, seniority and other benefits.

2. The petitioner was appointed as a Cook m the Community Health Centre at Sullia by an order dated 19.3.1988. He had reported for duty w.e.f. 21.3.1988. The Medical Officer terminated his services as per the order dated 18.7.1996. The petitioner challenged the said order by filing an application LCM No.27/1996 under Section 10(4-A) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, before the Labour Court, Mangalore. The Labour Court by its order at Annexure-A.2 dated 31.3.1998, set aside the order of termination dated 18.7.1996 with a further direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in his original post or the post equivalent to it with full backwages, with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits. Since the respondents did not comply with the award, he filed a writ petition in W.P.No. 18127/1999 seeking implementation of the award. This Court passed an order dated 13.7.1999 directing reinstatement of the petitioner within two months from the date of the order on current wages. In obedience of the said order, the respondents reinstated the petitioner to his original post.

3. The petitioner made an application seeking regularization of his services. Since the said application was not considered, he filed Application No.8501/2001 before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore, seeking regularization of his services from the date on which he was initially appointed and for grant of all the consequential benefits. The Tribunal by its order dated 27.11.2006 rejected the said application. He challenged the said order by filing W.P.No.5826/2008. A Division Bench of this Court allowed the writ petition on 28.01.2011, set aside the order of the Tribunal referred to above and directed the respondents/authorities to consider the application of the petitioner for regularization in accordance with the decision of the Apex Court in State of Karnataka and Ors., Vs. M.L. Kesari & Ors., - (2004) 9 SCC 247. The second respondent has once again rejected the application as per Annexure-A.9 dated 24.08.2011. The petitioner challenged the said order before the Tribunal in Application No.7238/2011. The Tribunal has rejected the said application by its order at Annexure-C dated 12.9.2013. As stated above, the petitioner has called in question the validity of the said order in this writ petition.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner was appointed as a Cook in Community Health Centre at Sullia by order dated 19.3.1988 against the sanctioned post. He was illegally terminated by the Medical Officer with effect from 18.7.1996. The petitioner has challenged the said order by raising a dispute under Section 10 (4-A) of Act, before the Labour Court. The Labour Court has set aside the order of termination and further directed the respondents to reinstate the petitioner to his original post with full backwages, with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits. This order has been implemented by the authorities having regard to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No. 18127/ 1999. The order of the Labour Court has attained finality. Relying on the decision of the Apex Court in M.L. Kesari's case (supra) it is argued that petitioner was not working pursuant to any interim order passed by a Court or authority. The order of the Labour Court is binding on the parties. In this connection, he has drawn our attention to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Stats of Karnataka, represented by its Secretary to Social Welfare Department Vs. Ayyanna - ILR 2007 KAR 3932. Once the order of termination has been set aside and he has be