STATE OF J&K Vs. SAIJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.07.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in SWP No. 2366/2009, whereby the learned Single judge while quashing the order dated 05.05.2006 issued by the Project Officer, District Rural Development Agency, Doda, directed the writ respondents, appellants herein, to release all the service benefits in favour of writ petitioner with effect from the date he was terminated from service till the date he came to be reinstated. The facts leading to the filing of present appeal, as borne out from the writ record, are that the writ petitioner came to be appointed as a Driver on substantive basis against a clear vacancy by the Project Officer, District Rural Development Agency, Doda, appellant No. 4 herein, vide order dated 20.07.1984. On 06.11.1985 the then Assistant Project Officer had taken the official Jeep from Ramban to Ramnagar in connection with her personal visit. In the way the traffic police authorities checked the vehicle and the writ petitioner bonafidely narrated the true fact that the vehicle was being taken to Ramnagar in connection with the personal visit of the then Assistant Project Officer. The traffic police authorities challaned the vehicle for its misuse as the same was being utilized for non-official purpose. The then Assistant Project Officer felt offended by the statement of writ petitioner and she lodged a complaint against him alleging insubordination and rude behavior. Project Officer, District Rural Development Agency, Doda, appellant No. 4 herein, acting on the complaint terminated the service of petitioner with effect from 05.12.1985 vide order dated 28.03.1986. Feeling aggrieved, the writ petitioner filed SWP No. 368/1986 in this Court and this Court vide order dated 30.10.1986 disposed of the same with a direction to the respondents to conduct inquiry into the matter afresh and complete the same within a period of two months. The inquiry Officer after consideration of the material brought on record during inquiry came to the conclusion that the allegations levelled against the writ petitioner had not been proved as the same were baseless and incorrect. He, accordingly, vide his report dated 30.04.1997 recommended for revocation of the termination order and treating the writ petitioner in service with effect from the date he came to be terminated with all consequential benefits. Thereafter, the writ petitioner came to be reinstated in service vide order dated 05.11.1999 and he submitted his joining report on 20.11.1999. The writ petitioner though was allowed to join his duties as a Driver, but was not given his dues like arrears of pay, increments, fixation of salary on the basis of pay revision etc. Aggrieved of the same, he again filed SWP No. 2136/2000 in this Court claiming the said benefits. The writ petition came to be disposed of vide order dated 18.05.2005 with the following direction:

(2.) Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, the writ petitioner submitted representation to the writ respondents. However, the writ respondents vide order dated 05.05.2006 rejected the claim of petitioner on the basis of "no work no pay". Writ petitioner questioned the said order by the medium of SWP No. 2366/2009. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 16.07.2013, impugned herein, quashed the order dated 05.05.2006 with a direction to the writ respondents to release all service benefits in favour of writ petitioner from the, date he was terminated from service till he was reinstated. It is this order which is challenged in the present Letters Patent Appeal by the State.

(3.) The sole ground taken in the appeal by the State is that the writ petitioner was not reinstated in service but was re-employed in the District Rural Development Agency (DRDA); therefore, there arises no question of giving him the arrears of pay for the period he was out of service. Further, it is contended that even otherwise the writ petitioner is not entitled to the arrears of pay on the basis of no work no pay.