Rajesh Balia, J.-This contempt petition and the reply submitted thereto by Respondent No. 2 shows the casual and cavalier fashion in which the respondents have treated and dealt with the directions issued by this Court.

2. Way back in 1986 in a petition filed in 1984, the applicant was dismissed from service by respondent Corporation which was subjected to SB Civil Writ Petition No. 305/84. The applicant was a

driver and was employed by the respondent Corporation to ply its vehicle. The appellate order of affirming the punishment was found to be bad and this Court by order dated 10.06.1986 quashed and set aside the appellate order dated 22.02.1984 and directed the appellate authority to decide the matter afresh by a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner was directed to remain present himself before the appellate authority on 31.07.1986 which he duly complied with.

3. No order having been passed in appeal, therefore, the petitioner under mistaken advice took recourse to industrial disputes challenging the order of punishment and reference was made to the Labour Court. The Labour Court made an award on 09.04.1999, it found