by the bank as well as settlement recorded in writing, respective complaints came to be disposed of. Bank directed imposition of punishment of stoppage of one increment instead of putting extreme penalty of dismissal from service. Respondents – employees were held dis-entitled to claim backwages during the period of suspension till the date of retirement. Appellant – bank, after order of appointment of Administrative Body, resolved to review the decision in the shape of resolution adopted by the bank permitting re-instatement of employees which decision was placed before the Lok Nyayalaya for facilitating disposal of complaints presented by respective employees. The Managing Committee of the bank, acting on the authorisation issued by the general body, directed dismissal of respective employees straight way without holding any enquiry. Order of dismissal was subjected to challenge in complaint presented by respective employees before Labour Court, which were allowed and it was directed to re-instate respective employees by setting aside order of dismissal. Labour Court directed re-instatement of employees with full backwages and with continuity. Order passed by the Labour Court was challenged by the bank by presenting revision applications which were allowed partly and the employees were held entitled to only 50% backwages. Said order has been interfered with by the learned Single Judge and the employees are held entitled to receive 100% backwages. It is observed by the learned Single
