GENERAL MANAGER Vs. T M DAYANANDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Labour Court, Madras dated 12.8.96 in Claim Petition No.11/1981. Said Claim petition was filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 by the respondent No.1 against the petitioner. The respondent No.1 was appointed as a Commercial Clerk in Southern Railway with effect from 1.10.1964. On the basis of the disciplinary proceedings, he was removed from service on 29.2.1969. Against the penalty, appeal was preferred by him. Since the appeal had remained pending for a long period, the first respondent preferred W.P.No.3171 of 1971 for disposal of the appeal and by order dated 18.11.1971 such a direction. Thereafter the appellate authority set aside the penalty imposed and directed the disciplinary authority to take disciplinary action from the stage of issue of show cause notice. By a subsequent Memorandum dated 24.11.1971 the first respondent s absence was treated as neither on duty nor on leave. Thereafter, on 28.2.1972, a notice was issued to the first respondent to show cause as to why he should not be removed from the service. The Divisional Personnel Officer issued a fresh penalty advice dated 4.10.1972 once again removing the first respondent from service with effect from 8.10.1972. The first respondent filed W.P.No.2874 of 1972 challenging the said order. The said writ petition was allowed on 21.1.1977 with the observation that it would be open to the Divisional Personnel Officer to rehear the matter after giving opportunity of hearing to the first respondent. The subsequent proceedings resulted in an order being passed appointing the first respondent as Commercial Clerk afresh for all purposes in the existing pay scale of Rs.260-430 in accordance with the orders passed by the Divisional Superintendent and the first respondent reported for duty making it clear that he was reporting for the duty without prejudice to his rights. Though he had reported for duty on 10.8.1977, no posting was given till 11.5.1978, on which date, the respondent No.1 was posted as a Leave Reserve Commercial Clerk. It is the grievance of the petitioner in the petition under Section 33-C(2) that even though it was indicated in the memorandum of the Divisional Personal Officer that previous service would not be counted for any purpose, on being reinstated, he must be deemed to be in continuous service and eligible to the salary he would be entitled to with all due increments and allowances and it must be deemed that he did not suffer any break of service for any purpose whatsoever. It was also claimed that he was entitled to the salary and allowance from 22.12.1969 till 13.5.1978. The arrears of salary amounting to Rs.58,454/-, was claimed.

(2.) A counter affidavit was filed by the present petitioner in the claim petition. While recounting the history of various litigations, it was indicated that the present respondent NO.1, on compassionate ground was ordered to be taken as Commercial Clerk afresh for all purposes and he having been accepted such appointment, is not entitled to the salary for the period claimed by him. It was further indicated that during the period of suspension, the respondent No.1 was paid suspension allowance and by earlier order, the period was directed to be neither on duty nor on leave, and therefore, for the said period no amount would be payable.

(3.) By order dated 20.12.1988 passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Labour Court, the present petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.58,454/-. O.A.No.42/90 directed against the said order was disposed of on 17.7.1992. The Administrative Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the matter for fresh disposal. Thereafter, the Presiding Officer has passed the impugned order directing payment of Rs.58,454/-.