IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.2 of 2008 Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Pariwahan Bhawan, Birchand patel path, Patna through its Administrator ……Appellant Versus 1. Gyaneshwar Prasad Yadav s/o Sri Manchar Gope, resident of Mohalla – Mangala Gauri, P.O. Chand Choura, P.S. Civil Lines, District Gaya 2. Divisional Manager, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Muzaffarpur 3. Additional Managing Director, Bihar State Road Corporation, Patna 4. Special Duty Officer, Headquarter, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Patna …… Respondents --- For the appellant: Mr. Nand Kumar Singh, Advocate For the respondents : Mr. Archana Sinha, Advocate ----------- 9 22-01-2009 Respondent – appellant aggrieved by the order dated 8th March, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC. No.11320 of 2003 has preferred this appeal under Clause – 10 of the Letters Patent. Respondent no.1 – petitioner is an employee of the appellant Bihar State Road Transport Corporation and was serving as a driver. He was dismissed from service in the year 1991. As certain proceedings were pending before the Industrial Tribunal, Patna, appellant sought approval of the order of dismissal as required under section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial - 2 - Disputes Act, 1947. Industrial Tribunal refused to accord approval to the order of dismissal. Respondent no.1 made request to the employer for accepting the joining but when failed came to this court in writ jurisdiction, inter alia, seeking direction to the respondent – the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation to accept his joining on the ground that the order of dismissal in law has become non-est on the ground of refusal to accord approval by the Industrial Tribunal. The learned Single Judge taking into account the ratio of the Constitution Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Jaipur Zila Sahkari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. vs. Ram Gopal Sharma, (2002) 2 SCC 244, held that on the ground of non- approval of the order of dismissal, the employee continues to be in service as if the order of discharge or dismissal was never passed. Accordingly, the learned Single Judge directed the appellant to accept the joining and re-instate him in service as if the order of dismissal was never passed. It also directed that respondent no.1 shall be entitled to his back-wages and consequential - 3 - benefits. We do not find any error in the same. Appeal stands dismissed in limine. Neyaz/- C.K. Prasad, ACJ. S. K. Sharma, J.