SHAFI GANAI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the medium of instant writ petition, petitioner assails order No. 1155 of 2010 dated 21.12.2010 passed by respondent-3 in terms whereof annual increment of petitioner was stopped for a period of two years, wages were denied for the period of absence from duty till his reinstatement and decision in regard to wages for the period beginning 28.5.2005 till reinstatement of petitioner was deferred. Heard the rival sides and perused the record.

(2.) Petitioner's case is that he was appointed as Constable in 1986. Despite discharging his duties with dedication, he was subjected to harassment by respondents. He was not allowed to mark attendance. Later he was removed from services without enquiry vide order No. 766 of 1994 dated 21.12.1994. Order of removal from services came to be assailed through the medium of S.W.P. No. 1494/1995, which was decided on 28.5.2005. The petition was allowed and the order of removal of petitioner from services was quashed. It was specifically held that petitioner shall not be entitled to any back wages, pay or salary for the period he remained out of service, as a consequence of quashment order. It was left to the disciplinary authority to decide about the period for which back wages, pay or salary shall not be admissible. The judgment passed in S.W.P. No. 1494/1995 was unsuccessfully assailed by respondents through LPA No. 15/2006. LPA was dismissed on 2.9.2009. Consequently petitioner was reinstated vide order No. 922 of 2009 dated 14.10.2009. He joined the duties and after enquiry the punishments in the nature of stoppage of annual increment for two years and treating the period from 25.2.1994 to 28.5.2005 as dies non, were inflicted Petitioner assails impugned order No. 1155 dated 21.12.2010 passed by respondent-3 on the ground that the impugned order has been passed in blatant violation of rules and procedure established by law for conducting departmental enquiry, that the petitioner has not been provided fair opportunity of defending himself during enquiry, that the impugned order inflicting major punishments has been passed without affording petitioner an opportunity of showing cause against proposed punishments and that the impugned order is violative of constitutional guarantees.

(3.) In their reply affidavit, the respondents have seriously objected to the maintainability of writ petition. It is pleaded that the petitioner had absented from duties on 25.2.1994 and it was for his continuous absence that he was removed from services by Commandant JKAP 6th Battalion w.e.f. 25.2.1994 in terms of order No. 766 dated 21.12.1994. Petitioner assailed order of removal from services by filing S.W.P. No. 1494/1995, which was allowed in terms of judgment dated 28.5.2005. The order of removal from services was quashed but back wages were denied to petitioner for the period he remained out of service, the period to be decided by the disciplinary authority in accordance with finding in the enquiry. It is pleaded that the respondents preferred LPA No. 15/2006 against the judgment of this court dated 28.5.2005. LPA was dismissed vide order dated 2.9.2009 holding that there was no scope to interfere with the judgment. Consequently petitioner was reinstated into service vide order No. 922 of 2009 dated 14.10.2009 with immediate effect.