( 1 ) THIS appeal filed under Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the allahabad High Court Rules by the U. P. Financial Corporation through its chairman, the Managing Director of the Corporation and the Board of directors of the Corporation through its Chairman is directed against the judgment dated 1. 8. 1994 of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8472 of 1984. In the impugned judgment the learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition, quashed the order passed by the Board of Directors of the Corporation (for short, the Board) dated 30th June, 1984, which was communicated to the petitioner by the Managing Director of the Corporation by his letter dated 30th june, 1984 (Annexure 27 to the writ petition) and directed that the petitioner shall be reinstated on the post held by him forthwith with all benefits, leaving it open to the Corporation to initiate fresh proceedings against the petitioner if it so desires.

( 2 ) ON analysis of the farts of the case, the findings recorded and the observations made by the learned single Judge and the arguments of the learned Counsel for the parties, the only question which needs determination is whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner-respondent No. 1 is entitled to full backwages / salary for the period from the order of dismissal till his reinstatement in service. The learned Counsel for the appellants accepted the position that on the findings recorded by the learned single Judge, the direction for reinstatement of the petitioner-respondent No. 1 in service cannot be assailed. Therefore, learned Counsel for the parties concentrated on the question of payment of arrear salary wages to the petitioner-respondent No. 1.

( 3 ) THE facts of the case, sans unnecessary details, may be stated thus : the petitioner-respondent No. 1 Shri V. P. Sharma was appointed as senior Manager (Finance) by the Corporation. He was posted as Zonal Manager in the year 1978 and later on he was designated as Regional Manager in the year 1979. When he was posted as Regional Manager at Jhansi, the Managing Director of the Corporation ordered initiation of disciplinary proceeding against him and his suspension on 5. 11. 1981 and the said order was served on him on 10. 11. 1981. In the charge-sheet dated 5. 11. 1981 served on the petitioner-respondent No. 1, in short, the following charges were framed against him. (i) In the case of M/s. Farmer Brothers, Jhansi a proprietorship concern of Shri Azamat Khan in whose favour a term loan of Rs. 1. 89 lacs was -sanctioned by the Internal Committee of the Corporation for setting up a unit of Bakery at D - 16. UPSIDC. Industrial area. Bajoli. District Jhansi, the petitioner- respondent no. 1. authorised payment to be made to the Bank in contravention of the set norms of the Corporation and further despite the fact that the building plan of the unit was not approved by the competent authority, he authorised disbursement against the building, which was against the norms prescribed by the Corporation. Under this charge it was further alleged that although the security furnished by the party was giving zero per cent margin on the previously disbursed loan as against the stipulated margin of 15 per cent and no further disbursement was recommended by the Assistant Manager (T) of the Regional Office. Jhansi. the petitioner - respondent No. 1 authorised the payment of Rs. 18,540/- on 31. 3. 1980 despite the fact that the earlier disbursed loan had not been utilised properly. It was also alleged that during inspection of the unit on 7. 1. 1981 conducted by Shri y. P. Gupta. Deputy Senior Manager (P) it was reported inter alia that the specifications of the machines brought by the party were not in accordance with the specification approved by the sanctioning authority and that from the exterior appearance it was evident that this showed that the petitioner respondent No. permitted disbursement in the case without observing due precautions, which resulte