CIVIL PASWAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .while was -Inspector of Police in the District of Dhanbad, was dismissed from service on 2.8.2002 when the charges levelled against him were found to be proved in a departmental proceeding. However, the order of dismissal was challenged before this Court and this Court having quashed the order of dismissal passed an order of reinstatement and also for fresh inquiry vide order dated 18.6.2003 passed in W.P.(S) No. 6399 of 2002. Pursuant to that, a fresh inquiry was initiated and the petitioner on being found guilty for the charges was again dismissed vide order dated 19.1.2005. That order, dismissing the petitioner from service, was again challenged before this Court vide W.P.(S) No. 1208 of 2005 which was also dismissed by this Court. However, the order passed by learned Single Judge on being challenged in L.PA No. 537 of 2006 was set aside and consequently, the order of dismissal also stood set aside. Thereupon, the petitioner filed a representation before the competent Authority for allowing him to join on the said post, but when no order was passed, the petitioner again approached this Court for a direction to the Authority to pass order on the representation which had been filed on 9.4.2007 and thereupon the petitioner's joining was accepted and thereafter the petitioner made prayer for payment of arrears of salary from 2.8.2002 2.Allowed to join on the said post i.e. from 2.8.2002 to 28.6.2003 and from 19.1.2005 to 9.4.2007 and also salary for four months i.e. from 22.3.1994 to 22.1.1994, but no order was passed and under that circumstances, the petitioner was compelled to move this Court by this writ application, whereby the prayer has been made to direct the respondents to pay the arrears of salary for the period as aforesaid. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 6 Superintendent of Police, Dumka and also a supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 3 Inspector General of Police (Karmic), Jharkhand, Ranchi, wherein it has been stated that notwithstanding the fact that the order of the petitioner's dismissal was set aside, he is not entitled to arrears of salary on the principle of 'no work no pay'. However, it has been stated that the said period may be treated as extra ordinary so that the said period may not be treated as breakage in service and that period from 22.3.1994 to 22.7.1994 during which the petitioner was under -suspension, would be treated as period of duty for which the petitioner would be entitled to pay for the said period.

(2.) . Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the petitioner, consequent upon setting aside of the order terminating his services, is asking for the arrears of salary for the period during which his services stood terminated. However, the said, claim is being denied on the ground of 'no work no pay' but the stand taken by the respondents of 'no work no pay' does not seem to be justified. Normally, if an order of dismissal/ removal is declared illegal and is set aside by the court of law/competent Authority, it is presumed that there is no order of removal in the eye of law and the person automatically stands reinstated with consequential benefits i.e. seniority, arrears of salary etc. This proposition of law gets reflected from a decision rendered in the case of G.T. lad vs. Chemicals and Fibres India Limited reported in AIR 1979 SC 582 holding therein that where the reinstatement has been directed by the Court, the entire back wages must. follow as a matter of course. 4. Under this situation, the order of termination havi'19 been set aside by the

(3.) . Accordingly, the respondents are hereby directed to pay the petitioner his full back wages for the period from 2.8.2002 to 28.6.2003 and then from 19.1.2005 to 9.4.2007 within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 6. With this observation and direction, this writ application stands disposed of.