“4. It is next contended by Mr.Ramakrishna Ayyar that, in any event the order of the Commissioner was bad insofar as it directed a reinstatement in service of the first respondent. The argument was that, there is no specific provision in the Act which enabled the Authority to make an order of reinstatement. He referred us by way of analogy to the jurisdiction of Industrial Tribunals to make orders of reinstatement, but, we think such reference is wholly irrelevant. To a certain extent we agree with the learned counsel, namely, that the Authority should not have said that the employee would be entitled to reinstatement. But this is only quarrelling with his language. Actually the legal position is this. The employer passes an order dispensing with the services of an employee. That order is carried on appeal to a higher Authority. That Authority reverses the decision of the employer and the result is that, the order of the employer is set aside. It is no longer in existence. It follows that, the effect of the original order of the employer also disappears and it is as if the order is nonest. Though, therefore, it may not be quite accurate to say that the employee will be entitled to reinstatement in service, yet the result of the order of the Appellate Authority is virtually the same. Probably, the result is that, the appellate order is even better than an order of reinstatement. It is as if the employee had never been properly dismissed from service. In this view, it is not necessary to quash the order of the appellate authority even in this respect.”
