1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1356 OF 2010 (M.N. Mudiraj vs. The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JULY 09, 2010. Heard finally Shri Bhoot, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Almelkar, learned counsel for the respondent, by making Rule returnable forthwith. Shri Bhoot, learned counsel states that the application for restoration of reference has been erroneously rejected ignoring that on 21.07.2008 next date was given to the counsel as 29.09.2008. Though the reference was thus adjourned, an award rejecting reference came to be delivered on 22.07.2008. The application was filed on 05.09.2008 as the award was published on 21.08.2008 i.e. within one month. The reliance is being placed on the judgment in the case of Grindlays Bank vs. Central Government Industrial Tribunal, reported at 1981 LIC 155. Shri Almelkar, learned counsel for the respondent – employer points out that the petitioner did not conduct the proceedings before C.G.I.T. diligently and did not file statement of claims for more than nine months. According to him, there is no merit in the reference and punishment of compulsory retirement has 2 been challenged unnecessarily. He further contends that only with a view to kill time and to earn wages without working, the petitioner avoided to take appropriate steps. After hearing respective counsel, I find that C.G.I.T. has not recorded any finding on the stand of the petitioner that on 21.07.2008 the matter was adjourned to 29.09.2008. If this is the correct position, no award could have been delivered before 29.09.2008. It also shows that the counsel for the petitioner was looking after the matter. I, therefore, do not find any malafides. The anxiety of Shri Almelkar, learned counsel, about the entitlement to wages for this period can be looked into by the C.G.I.T. while deciding the proceedings finally. The respondent – Bank is permitted to raise this issue in its written statement before C.G.I.T. Subject to this liberty to the respondent – Bank, the award delivered on 22.07.2008 is hereby quashed and set aside. The proceedings in Reference No. 48 of 2007 on the file of C.G.I.T., Nagpur, are restored back to its file for taking fresh decision in accordance with law. The parties to appear before C.G.I.T., Nagpur, on 10th August 2010 and to abide by its further directions in the matter. Writ Petition is disposed of. Rule accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.