High Court of Uttarakhand · 2025

Judgment

( p e r H o n ’ b l e Ju st i c e Sr i M a n o j K u m a r Ti w a r i )

1. Pet it ioner was appoint ed as Const able PAC in erst while St at e of U.P. in t he year 1987. His services were t erm inat ed by invoking Ut t ar Pradesh Tem porary Governm ent Servant ( Term inat ion of Service) , Rules,

1975, vide order dat ed 09.07.1998. He challenged t he said t erm inat ion order before U.P. Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow by filing a claim pet it ion, which upon St at e reorganizat ion, was t ransferred t o Ut t arakhand Public Services Tribunal and was regist ered as Claim Pet it ion No.181/ T/ 2002. The said claim pet it ion was decided by learned Tribunal, vide j udgm ent dat ed 18.01.2008, wherein t he t erm inat ion order dat ed 09.07.1998 was set aside. The operat ive port ion of t he j udgm ent rendered by learned Tribunal is ext ract ed below: - 1 “ I n t he light of discussion abov e, t he im pugned order dat ed 19.07.1998 does not st and scr ut iny of law and it is her eby set aside. The pet it ioner is ent it led t he reinst at em ent from t he dat e of his t erm inat ion order and he shall be deem ed t o be in regular service from t he dat e of t erm inat ion or der. Ther e is no or der t o t he salary on t he basis of no work no pay and also no or der t o t he cost .”

2. The j udgm ent rendered by learned Tribunal was challenged by St at e of Ut t arakhand in Writ Pet it ion No.55 ( S/ B) of 2008, which was dism issed by Coordinat e Bench, vide j udgm ent dat ed 17.10.2011.

3. Since t he pet it ioner was not given consequent ial service benefit s, including A.C.P., t he period he rem ained out of em ploym ent , t herefore, he m ade a represent at ion seeking such benefit s. His represent at ion was rej ect ed by t he Com pet ent Aut horit y, vide order dat ed

30.06.2018. Pet it ioner challenged t he order dat ed

30.06.2018 by filing Claim Pet it ion No.84/ DB/ 2018, which has been dism issed by learned Tribunal, vide j udgm ent dat ed 18.11.2019. Relevant paragraphs of t he said j udgm ent are ext ract ed below: - “ 8. Hon’ble High Cour t , while affirm ing t he order of t he Tribunal, did not grant any ot her r elief t o t he pet it ioner . I t was open t o t he pet it ioner t o have pray ed for all t hese reliefs w hich he has claim ed her e, befor e Hon’ble High Court ( ev en if he was r espondent t her e) . I t is not open t his Tribunal, now, t o t ravel beyond w hat was observ ed by t he Hon’ble High Court . Tribunal’s earlier 2 order has t o be kept in t he backdrop, w hile deciding present claim pet it ion.

9. The im port of Tribunal’s earlier order , as w e under st and, is t hat t here will be no break in service of t he pet it ioner. He has been r einst at ed and shall be deem ed t o be in regular service t he dat e of t erm inat ion or der. Even if salary has not been order ed t o be paid t o him on t he principle of ‘no work no pay’, t he effect of Tribunal’s earlier or der would be t hat he will be deem ed t o be in cont inuous service from t he dat e on which t he order of t erm inat ion of his services was issued.

10. I n t he circum st ances, how can ot her benefit s be given t o him ? I t is beyond one’s com pr ehension t o infer t hat he would be ent it led t o annual incr em ent , ACP, Select ion Grade, Leave, Pay Revision during t he period he did not work and t he Tribunal did not order salary t o be paid t o him during t he period his services w ere t erm inat ed.

11. I t is not open for us t o t ravel beyond what was held by t he Tribunal in it s earlier order and w hat has been direct ed by t he Hon’ble High Court in writ pet it ion.

12. Ld. Counsel t he pet it ioner placed decision rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in Shant i Niket an, Hindi Prim ary School v s. Pal Hariram , 2010 SCLJ 762. Pal Hariram ’s case is dist inguishable t he fact s of present case, in t he sense t hat t he Tribunal, in t hat case had quashed t he im pugned order passed by Shant i Niket an School and dir ect ed reinst at em ent of Pal Harir am wit h full salary and ot her benefit s from t he dat e of t erm inat ion t ill t he dat e of t he order. I n t he inst ant case, t he Tribunal had wit hheld salary of t he pet it ioner. He was sim ply r einst at ed and direct ion was given t hat he shall be deem ed in regular service from t he dat e of t er m inat ion order . Ther e was no dir ect ion for paym ent of salary in t he 3 inst ant case, w hereas in Pal Hariram ’s case, full salary and ot her benefit s were direct ed t o be grant ed.

13. Ld. Counsel for t he pet it ioner also placed r eliance upon t he decision render ed by Hon’ble Apex Cour t in St at e of Ut t aranchal vs. Khadag Singh, 2008 ( 5) SLR

586. Again, t he fact s of such decision are dist inguishable from t he fact s of present case. Hon’ble Suprem e Court did not int erfere in t he finding given by Hon’ble High Court in Khadag Singh’s decision, in which Hon’ble High Court had direct ed t he appellant t o reinst at e t he respondent in service wit h all consequent ial benefit s, which consequent ial benefit s w ere conspicuous by t heir absence in t he inst ant case. The wor ds used by t his Tribunal in it s ear lier order w ere – “ t here is no or der t o t he salary on t he basis of no wor k no pay......”

14. The sam e is t he sit uat ion in t he decision of St at e of U.P. and ot her s v s. Saroj Kum ar Sinha, 2010 SCLJ 634, in which Hon’ble Apex Court did not int erfere wit h t he j udgm ent of Hon’ble High Court , who had direct ed t he em ployee t o be r einst at ed in service wit h all consequent ial benefit s. Here t he Tribunal, in t he ear lier order , did not do so. Hon’ble High Court of Ut t arakhand did not add anyt hing t o t he relief grant ed t o pr esent pet it ioner by t he Tribunal.

15. Reliance has also been placed upon a Governm ent Or der, r elat ing t o grant of Tim e Bound Pay Scale and Assur ed Career Progression Schem e ( for short , ACP) . These Governm ent Order s would hav e been relevant when t his Tribunal hear d t he pet it ion for t he first t im e and decided t he m at t er . When t he Tribunal had passed t he order and such order was affirm ed by t he Hon’ble High Court , it is not open t o us t o reconsider what was not grant ed t o t he pet it ioner by t he Tribunal.

16. The claim pet it ion is hereby dism issed. No order as 4 t o cost s.”

4. Pet it ioner has challenged t he j udgm ent dat ed

18.11.2019 passed by learned Tribunal, whereby his claim pet it ion was dism issed, in t his writ pet it ion.

5. Learned counsel for t he pet it ioner cont ends t hat since in t he earlier claim pet it ion, wherein t he pet it ioner had challenged t he t erm inat ion order, learned Tribunal had not only set aside t he t erm inat ion order but had also direct ed t hat t he pet it ioner shall be deem ed t o be in regular service t he dat e of t erm inat ion order, t herefore, pet it ioner is ent it led t o be reinst at ed wit h cont inuit y in service, t herefore, t here was no reason or j ust ificat ion, what soever, for wit hholding t he service benefit s, including t he A.C.P. t o him .

6. He furt her subm it s t hat t he Com pet ent Aut horit y rej ect ed pet it ioner ’s claim for such benefit s wit h t ot al non applicat ion of m ind, vide order dat ed 30.06.2018, and t he learned Tribunal also went ast ray while dism issing t he claim pet it ion on t he ground t hat since pet it ioner did not seek such benefit s before t he High Court , t herefore, t he reliefs claim ed by t he pet it ioner in subsequent claim pet it ion cannot be grant ed. Pet it ioner subm it s t hat before t he High Court , St at e was t he pet it ioner, which had challenged t he j udgm ent rendered by t he learned Tribunal, t herefore, pet it ioner had no occasion t o seek any new relief in a pet it ion, in which he was added as a respondent . 5

7. He furt her subm it s t hat as a result of set t ing aside t he t erm inat ion order by t he learned Tribunal, it shall be deem ed, as if, pet it ioner was never t erm inat ed from service and he rem ained in cont inuous service t hroughout ; alt hough pet it ioner would not be ent it led t o arrears of salary, in view of st ipulat ion m ade by t he learned Tribunal in it s earlier j udgm ent , however, t here is no reason for denying him ot her benefit s, which every governm ent servant is ent it led t o, based on his/ her lengt h of service.

8. We find subst ance in t he subm issions m ade by learned counsel for t he pet it ioner.

9. Since t he order of t erm inat ion of service was set aside by learned Tribunal on t he ground t hat pet it ioner cannot be t reat ed as t em porary governm ent em ployee aft er t en years of his appoint m ent and wit hout holding disciplinary enquiry his services could not have been t erm inat ed, t herefore, as a nat ural corollary, pet it ioner will be deem ed t o be in cont inuous service t hroughout . Thus, pet it ioner becam e ent it led t o increm ent s, t hough not ionally, for t he period he rem ained out of em ploym ent t he period during which he rem ained out of em ploym ent , on account of t erm inat ion of his service, has t o be t aken int o account for m onet ary benefit s, including A.C.P., which are available t o sim ilarly sit uat e governm ent em ployees, as per Governm ent Policy.

10. The reasoning given by learned Tribunal for dism issing t he claim pet it ion, in our considered opinion, 6 does not st and t o reason. Thus, we allow t he writ pet it ion, set aside t he j udgm ent in Claim Pet it ion No.84/ DB/ 2018 and direct t he Com pet ent Aut horit y t o consider t he claim of t he pet it ioner for m onet ary benefit s as per Governm ent Policy/ Rules, wit hin a period of six m ont hs from t he dat e of product ion of cert ified copy of t his order. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 24.06.2025 24.06.2025 Rajni RAJINI GUSAIN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=97cfa6e4cbd49c07b876db48448ac3701 a9ae475a2547e4b7f1d9b1f17d01342, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=8D039BC77BD1A2222B4DF4FC80 D4557562F95BEBA013F530616A158A0A878BD8, cn=RAJINI GUSAIN 7