Bangalore Metropolitan … vs M Manjula on 2 February, 2009

7. I find that. the Labour Court considering the evidence has
réghfly found mat. the charge is net proved, however. there is dflfifisfill
arises as regards to the entry of Rs.2l- on the back side 
whether it is by the respondent or during me enquiry,    K 

serious auegation agaénst the Corporafion-by {ha V
extent. there is some doubt arises. but

dismissal or any order of punishment uniess Afiatg A
fine grant of backwaaes under the E
my opinion, just because the Corporatiéniéis. it shoud
not be fasimed with payment of . _ . ._

8. Accordingly, this;’Wrfft-. The awad
insofar as directing is set! aside.
however. in respect ether’ étand mdisturbed