MD MOHIUDDIN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment and order of the learned state Administrative Tribunal dated May 13, 2002 has been challenged by this application. The learned Tribunal rejected the petitioner's claim of back wages for the period during which he remained discharged from services and upto the date of reinstatement, namely, commencing from January 30, 1989 to October 1, 1993.

(2.) THE fact of the case leading to bringing action by the applicant is shortly put hereunder: the petitioner on or about August 2, 1988 was appointed probationary Police Constable and after completion of his training and joining duty he was discharged by an order dated january 30, 1989. The above order of discharge was challenged by filing a writ petition and he was successful therein by obtaining an order of reinstatement on September 13, 1991. The order of reinstatement was passed by Hon'ble mr. Justice MAHITOSH MAJUMDAR (as His lordship then was) on September 30, 1991 not unconditionally or absolutely but liberty was given to the respondents to initiate regular disciplinary proceeding in terms of the rules. In the said order there has been no order for payment of back wages. From the narration of the fact recorded by the learned Judge, it does not appear that the petitioner prayed for back wages. In spite of the said order of reinstatement, the respondent did not carry out the same by reinstating the petitioner. As such, a contempt proceeding was initiated and ultimately on October 1, 1993 he was reinstated pending disposal of the contempt application. On recording such fact, contempt proceeding was disposed of without proceeding further. It is also to be noted that in the contempt proceeding there has been no relief for payment of back wages.

(3.) ON the aforesaid back ground the petitioner thereafter filed an application in 1997 for payment of back wages from the date of discharge and upto the date of reinstatement. The said application being O. A. 759 of 1997 was disposed of by an order dated August 5, 1997 directing the respondents to treat the said application as representation of the petitioner and dispose of the same by a speaking order within a stipulated time as mentioned therein.