(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
(2.) IN the present application, petitioner has made a claim for salary for the period 7th February 1992 to 25th September 1995, during which the petitioner remained out of service due to the order of termination passed against the petitioner which was reconsidered and the order of termination was substituted with substituted punishment of stoppage of one increment, vide Annexure-3 to the writ petition) and also for quashing the order passed by the respondent no.3 D.I.G., BMP, Central Zone, Patna, vide Annexure-7 to the writ petition whereby and whereunder he affirmed the order passed by Commandant B.M.P.5 in which it has been specifically mentioned that the petitioner will not be entitled to salary for the period 17th September 1995. IN this back ground, the only dispute in the matter is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to salary for the period 7th February 1992 to 25th September 1995, the period during which the petitioner did not work in the Department, as he remained under termination.
(3.) PETITIONER in the present writ petition is aggrieved only to the extent that when the order of discharge was substituted with reducing punishment, then he should be given his salary for the period 7th February 1992 to 25th September 1995, as contended by the petitioner that he was illegally discharged and that has been withdrawn later on and, as such, he cannot be deprived of the same.