1. As common question of law and facts arise in both the Second Appeals and they arise out of the common order passed by the learned appellate Court both the Second Appeals are disposed of by this common order.
1.1. Second Appeal No. 68/1987 has been preferred by the appellant-original plaintiff to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned appellate Court-learned District Judge, Rajkot dated 22/04/1985 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 143/1984 by which the learned lower appellate Court has denied backwages to the appellant-original plaintiff.
1.2. Second Appeal No. 3/1986 has been preferred by the appellant-original defendant to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rajkot dated 20/09/1984 in Regular Civil Suit No. 176/1983 confirmed by the learned appellate Court vide judgment and order dated 22/04/1985 in Regular Civil Appeal No. 143/1984 by which the learned trial Court decreed the said suit and granted declaration that the dismissal order passed by the appellant-original defendant Corporation dated 02/07/1982 and the order passed by the learned authority dated 21/02/1983 are illegal, unconstitutional, ineffective and null and void and not binding to the original plaintiff employee.
2. Today, when the present Second Appeals are taken up for final hearing, Shri D.M. Thakkar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant-original plaintiff has stated at the bar that he does not press Second Appeal No. 68/1987 as the appellant-original plaintiff has attained the age of superannuation. He has also stated at the bar that Second Appeal No. 3/1986 may also be disposed of on the statement that the appellant-original plaintiff shall not claim any retirement benefits and/or any other benefits on the basis of the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court quashing and setting aside the order of termination/dismissal dated 02/07/1982.
3. In view of the above, Second Appeal No. 68/1987 is dismissed as not pressed. So far as Second Appeal No. 3/1986 is concerned, it is disposed of by recording the statement of Shri Thakkar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant-original plaintiff that the appellant-original plaintiff shall not claim any retirement benefits and/or any other benefits on the basis of the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court confirmed by the learned appellate Court quashing and setting aside the order of dismissal dated 02/07/1982. In view of the above, Second Appeal No. 3/1986 is disposed of by observing that the appellant-original plaintiff shall not claim any right and/or any other benefits/retirement benefits on the basis of the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court confirmed by the learned appellate Court and, therefore, such a decree passed by the learned learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rajkot dated 20/09/1984 in Regular Civil Suit No. 176/1983 is held to be inexecutable.
4. With this, Second Appeal No. 68/1987 is dismissed as not pressed and Second Appeal No. 3/1986 is disposed of.
(M.R.
SHAH, J.) siji Top