DALJEET SINGH Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE, AMRITSAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Amritsar and Officer Incharge, Record Room (Judicial) has reported to the High Court on its administrative side that the original trial court record of the case has been destroyed in a recent fire incident along with other files lying in the old building of the Deputy Commissioner's office, Amritsar prior to the year 2001. The only available file is of the Appellate Court. Accordingly, counsel have been heard on the material available on the present file and the appellate record which is sufficient to decide the case on merits.

(2.) This is an appeal against the Appellate Court judgment and decree dated 17.09.1992 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, Amritsar. The case was of termination from service of the plaintiffappellant (hereafter 'plaintiff'). The removal of the plaintiff was based on a police report to the effect that the plaintiff was found to be a regular member of All India Sikh Students Federation with recommendation to the municipality that he should not be retained in service in public interest. The plaintiff was a Tubewell Driver in the Municipal Corporation, Amritsar. He was employed on work charge basis for a period of 89 days. He was not a regular hand. A criminal case was also registered against him. He was discharged by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar on November 07, 1985. After discharge, he was apparently allowed to join duty vide order dated February 07, 1986 on the basis of Punjab Government letter dated October 31, 1985. On the basis of police report, his services were terminated vide order dated September 11, 1986 against which he filed a suit for declaration that the order was illegal, void and deserves to be set aside and he is entitled to reinstatement in service with consequential benefits. The period of service was from 07.06.1985 to 11.09.1986 i.e. for a period of one year and three months.

(3.) The Trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 20.07.1988 partly decreed the suit. The termination order was set aside with the direction that he should be appointed as per the terms and conditions of the original appointment letter dated 31.05.1985. Since the pay for the time plaintiff worked was paid to him before termination, therefore, he was not entitled to any arrears of pay from the defendants. It was further directed that he would not be entitled to any arrears of pay during the period he was without work because he was appointed on work charge basis and no arrears could be allowed when the plaintiff had not worked.