1 D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (W) NO.100/2009 Nav Shikhsha Samaj Vs. Dr.Mahaveer Prasad & ors. Date of Order :: 25-08-2010 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JAGDISH BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. N.S. Mathur, for Mr. Kuldeep Mathur, for the appellant. Mr. R.K. Rathi, for the respondent. The contesting respondent has moved an application (IA No.11455/10) seeking orders for dismissal of the appeal due to non- compliance by the appellant of the requirements of the order passed in this appeal on 05.12.2009. The background aspects of the matter are that the contesting respondent was working with the appellant, a Non-Government Educational Institution, on the post of Lecturer but his services came to be terminated on 30.06.2002. The respondent challenged such termination of service before the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institution Tribunal, Jaipur ('The Tribunal') in Appeal No.188/2002. The Tribunal allowed the appeal so filed by the respondent on 19.02.2008 after finding that abrupt termination of service was without any reason and so also without affording any opportunity of hearing. While holding such termination of service illegal, the Tribunal directed reinstatement of the respondent with all consequential benefits. The present appellant attempted to question the order so passed by the Tribunal in the writ petition (CWP 2 No.6241/2008) that was heard and dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 07.11.2008 after finding no fault or illegality in the order passed by the Tribunal. The instant intra-court appeal has been preferred by the employer-institution against the aforesaid order dated 07.11.2008. This appeal was admitted on 5.10.2009 with the following order:- “Admit. Since the respondents are represented, notice need not be issued. Heard learned counsel on stay. The operation of the order, only to the extent of payment of 25% of the back-wages shall remain stayed. Rest all the back-wages shall be paid by the appellant and the respondent shall be reinstated within a period of one month. It is made clear that if the reinstatement is not made within one month and 75% of the arrears are not paid within one month, the appeal itself will stand dismissed without reference to the Court. The matter be listed for further consideration on stay after one month.” (emphasis supplied) It has been pointed out that the appellant did file a petition for Special Leave to Appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the aforesaid order dated 5.10.2009, being SLP No.28679/2009, that was dismissed on 16.11.2009. It is submitted by the respondent by way of the application (IA No.11455/10) that though the appellant reinstated him on 9.12.2009 but then, nothing has been paid towards back-wages and total compliance of order passed by the Court on 05.10.2009 has not been carried out. 3 It is an admitted position that the respondent has been reinstated in service but then, payment towards arrears has not been made to him. In the order dated 5.10.2009, it was made clear that in case 75% of the arrears were not paid within one month, the appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Court. It is, of course, noticed that on 16.11.2009, a Division Bench of this Court extended the time for payment of arrears and reinstatement until 5.12.2009 but with the stipulation that no further time will be granted. In fact, in the face of the stipulations of the order dated 5.10.2009, even granting of any further indulgence to the appellant was itself a doubtful proposition and, strictly speaking, with the expiry of the period of one month from 05.10.2009, upon non-compliance, the appeal stood dismissed. In any case, even while extending the period on 16.11.2009, the Division Bench made it clear that no further time would be granted. The period so extended has also expired long back; and complete compliance has not been carried out. Hence, the order dated 5.10.2009 operates in its full force. As a necessary consequence, this appeal stands dismissed. [DINESH MAHESHWARI],J. [JAGDISH BHALLA], CJ. Praveen