1. Reinstatement in service with a condition denying back wages — Acceptance of reinstatement by joining duty — Subsequent claim for back wages. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
2000 Supreme(SC) 1303
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANAT KUMAR DWIVEDI
Vs.
Dhar Jila Sahakari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Maryadit
Decided on August 9, 2000
Important Points
Acceptance of reinstatement without back wages through conduct rendered dispute regarding back wages not maintainable.
Subject
Employment Law - Reinstatement and Back Wages
Act Referred
Headnote
Reinstatement - Back Wages - The appellant was reinstated in service without back wages, and subsequently raised a dispute regarding back wages. The court held that the appellant's acceptance of the reinstatement without back wages through his conduct rendered the dispute regarding back wages not maintainable. The court dismissed the appeal, clarifying that the order did not result in a break in service and the appellant would be deprived only of back wages, with continuity of service and other benefits.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was reinstated in service without back wages, subsequently raised a dispute regarding back wages.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the appellant's acceptance of the reinstatement without back wages through his conduct rendered the dispute regarding back wages not maintainable. The court dismissed the appeal, clarifying that the order did not result in a break in service and the appellant would be deprived only of back wages, with continuity of service and other benefits.
Issues: Dispute regarding back wages after reinstatement without back wages.
Ratio Decidendi: The appellant's acceptance of the reinstatement without back wages through his conduct rendered the dispute regarding back wages not maintainable.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, clarifying that the order did not result in a break in service and the appellant would be deprived only of back wages, with continuity of service and other benefits.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Maintainability of a claim for back wages after accepting a reinstatement order that explicitly denied such wages. (Para 2 )
3. Acceptance of reinstatement without back wages by conduct precludes subsequent claims; reinstatement implies continuity of service and notional benefits. (Para 2 , 3 )
4. Acceptance of a reinstatement order without back wages by conduct renders a subsequent claim for such wages unmaintainable. (Para 2 )
5. Appeal dismissed; however, continuity of service and notional benefits are preserved. (Para 2 , 3 )
6. Does accepting reinstatement without back wages preclude a later claim for them?
Yes, when an employee accepts a reinstatement order without back wages through their conduct, such as by joining duty, any subsequent dispute raised regarding back wages is not maintainable. (Para 2 )
7. Does reinstatement without back wages imply a break in service?
No, reinstatement without back wages does not necessarily result in a break in service. Continuity of service and notional benefits are generally implicit in the act of reinstatement. (Para 3 )
( 1 ) WE have heard learned Counsel for the appellant as well as learned Counsel for respondent no. 1.
( 2 ) THE admitted facts are that the appellant was reinstated in service by order dated 12. 5. 1978 with a condition that he will not get any back wages. Obviously, earlier on 8. 3. 1976, his services were terminated but by the aforesaid order, he was reinstated without back wages. He accepted such reinstatement without back wages by his joining report, Annexure-R-4 at page 106 of the paper book that he had joined his duty on 13. 5. 1978. By his own conduct, the appellant has accepted the correctness of the order of reinstatement without back wages. Under these circumstances, subsequent dispute raised by him regarding back wages was clearly not maintainable as held by this Court in State of Punjab and Ors. v. Krishan Niwas reported in [jt 1997 (4) SC 213]. In view of the settled legal position, no interference is called for. The appeal is therefore, dismissed.
( 3 ) IT is clarified that this order will not be treated to be resulting in any break in service of the appellant. He will be deprived of only the back wages. The continuity of service and all other notional benefits on that basis will be available to him. It appears that when the order of reinstatement was granted, except depriving him of back wages, it necessarily meant that the continuity of service was implicit in the reinstatement. Even condition nos. 1 and 2 of the order of reinstatement clearly indicate that he is reinstated in service with continuity as pay scales and other benefits were also directed to be given.
( 4 ) NO costs.
