BINOD KUMAR ROY, U. S. TRIPATHI, JJ. ( 1 ) THE prayer of the petitioner is to quash the judgment and order dated 13. 7. 1988 passed by the u. P. Public Services Tribunal, (respondent No. 1) in Claim Case No. 335/t/v/80 (as contained in Annexure-10 ). ( 2 ) A perusal of the impugned order shows that the claim petition filed by respondent No. 2 for setting aside the order dated 20th May, 1976, passed by the Asstt. Regional Manager of the petitioner, terminating the services of respondent No. 2 as a Conductor has been allowed on the ground that the Asstt. Regional Manager lacked authority with a further direction that he shall be deemed to be continued in service with all consequential benefits in relation to pay and other allowances etc. ( 3 ) WITH reference to the statements made in paragraph Nos. 19 to 24 of the writ petition, it was contended by Sri Samir Sharma, learned counsel of the petitioner, that the Tribunal has committed a jurisdictional error in recording the finding of lack of authority for two reasons :-- (i)there was no such case set forth by respondent No. 2, in his claim petition and (ii) it was the asstt. General Manager, who was redesignated in the Corporation as Asstt. Regional Manager and thus there was no lack of authority in him while terminating the services of respondent No. 2. ( 4 ) SHRI Saxena, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2, very fairly does not dispute the legal propositions contended by Mr. Sharma, but still prayed that as no interim order was passed by this Court staying the full operation of the order passed by the Tribunal, respondent No. 2 continued in service and superannuated during the pendency of this writ petition on 31st December, 1997, and thus, this writ petition has become infructuous and be dismissed as such. Alternatively, he contended that since the Tribunal had not decided the claim on merit, thus the claim petition be remitted back for its adjudication on merit. ( 5 ) IN view of the admitted position at the Bar that the Terminating Authority had the authority to terminate the services of respondent No. 2, we hold that the Tribunal committed a serious error in allowing the claim petition of respondent No. 2. ( 5 ) IN view of the admitted position at the Bar that the Terminating Authority had the authority to terminate the services of respondent No. 2, we hold that the Tribunal committed a serious error in allowing the claim petition of respondent No. 2. Accordingly the impugned order cannot be upheld and has to be set aside. ( 6 ) THE contention of Sri Saxena that since during the pendency of this writ petition, respondent no. 2, who had rejoined his services and superannuated and thereby this writ petition has become infructuous on the first blush appeared attractive, but has got no force. On the petitioners pray to stay the operation of the impugned order, vide order dated 19. 9. 1988 the court merely directed that respondent No. 2 shall not be entitled to the past wages and vide order dated 26. 7. 2000 the said interim order was confirmed. It is well-settled that acts of Court prejudices none besides this Court has not lost its jurisdiction to do complete Justice to parties simply because the employee has superannuated in the meantime. ( 7 ) THE alternative contention of Mr. Saxena that since the respondent No. 1 had not adjudicated the grievances of respondent No. 2 on merits and thus the claim case be remitted back for a fresh disposal on merit is accepted. ( 8 ) CONSEQUENTLY this writ petition is allowed, the impugned order is set aside, and Claim Case no. 335 T/v/80 is remitted back to the Tribunal for disposal on merits in accordance with law. ( 9 ) HAVING regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances we make no order as to cost. ( 10 ) IT goes without saying that in view of the fact that the impugned order has been set aside, the petitioner shall be entitled to take any action in accordance with law though subject to the result of the claim case. ( 11 ) LET a copy of this order be sent by the office within 2 weeks to respondent No. 1 for a follow up action. .