JUDGMENT :

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.

1. These appeals arise from the very same judgment, whereby the learned Single Judge set aside the order of termination passed by the 'employer' and ordered reinstatement; however denying back-wages.

2. Writ Appeal No.368 of 2019 has been filed by the 'employee' being aggrieved by the denial of the back-wages and granting a further opportunity to the employer to conduct domestic enquiry, if they so desired, in respect of the alleged misconduct of unauthorized absence; despite the fact that the employee was granted leave without wages for the period in question.

3. Writ Appeal No.112 of 2020 has been filed by the 'employer' challenging the reinstatement order passed by the learned Single Judge and in directing to conduct an enquiry; whereas, the misconduct was admitted by the employee and that the proceedings were completed in accordance with the relevant rules of Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employee, Adarsh Seva Sharte Niyam, 1975 (for short, 'the Rule, 1975') where no separate enquiry is envisaged.

4. We heard Shri S.P. Kale, the learned counsel appearing for the employee and Shri Kishore Bhaduri, the learned counsel representing the employer