BINOD KUMAR SINGH Vs. COAL INDIA LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 2003 (4) JCR 222 (SC).

(2.) PETITIONER has accordingly sought quashment of the impugned communication dated 3.6.2004, order of dismissal dated 6.7.1999 and with further directions for payment of his salary and all other service benefits up to the date of his retirement on 31.8.2002. Respondents have resisted the claim of the petitioner on the same ground as urged in the impugned communication.

(3.) THE reinstatement of the petitioner into the service has already been ordered by the High Court. The only question is whether he is entitled to back wages. It was his conduct of involving himself in the crime that was taken not account for his not being in service of the respondent. Consequent upon his acquittal, he is entitled to reinstatement for the reason that his service was terminated on the basis of the conviction by operation of proviso to the statutory rules applicable to the situation. The question of back wages would be considered only if the respondents have taken action by way of disciplinary proceedings and the action was found to be unsustainable in law and he was unlawfully prevented form discharging the duties. In that context his conduct becomes relevant. Each case requires to be considered in its own backdrop. In this case, since the petitioner had involved himself in a crime, though he was later acquitted, he had disabled himself from rendering the service on account of conviction and incarceration in Jail. Under these circumstances the petitioner is not entitled to payment of back wages. The learned single Judge and the Division Bench have not committed any error of law warranting interference.