IMPORTANT POINT
On termination order being set aside and fresh order of termination being passed in pursuance of court order, earlier termination become redundant.

JUDGMENT

G. S. Singhvi, J.-This appeal is directed against order dated 5.2.2010 passed by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court whereby the civil miscellaneous application filed by the appellant in Writ Petition No.3902/2008 for issue of a direction to the respondents to pay him salary for the period between 5.11.2003 and 24.1.2006 was dismissed.

2. While he was holding the post of Post GraduateTeacher (Chemistry) in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (for short, ‘KVS’), the appellant’s services were terminated by the Commissioner, KVS under Article 81 (b) of the Education Code. CWP No.3354 of 1994 filed by the appellant was allowed by the learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court vide order dated 19.9.1994 and the termination of his service was quashed. The operative portion of that order reads as under:

“In the result I allow the writ petition, quash the order of dismissal dated February 11, 1988 and direct that the petitioner shall be reinstated in service forthwith with all consequential benefits from the date of his dismissal. Needless to say it would be open to the respondents, if so advised, to proceed against the petitioner afresh as per the Rules of the Education Code.”

3. LPA No.116/1994 filed by the respondents was dismissed by the Division Bench of the High Court. Thereafter, the Commissioner, KVS passed order dated 3.10.2000 for reinstatement of the appellant with a stipulation that the period during which he had not worked, i.e., from 11.2.1988 to the date of joining the duty shall be treated as ‘dies-non’.

4. Since the appellant was not given consequential benefits, he filed Contempt Petition No. 550/2000 which was disposed of by the learned Single Judge of the High Court vide order dated 25.1.2001, the relevant portion of which is reproduced below:

“In this case judgment of the learned Single Judge has merged in the judgment passed in LPA. There is no dispute about one aspect that the petitioner has been appointed vide annexure-2 vide order 3.10.2000 at page 33. In case there is non compliance of order of Division Bench then petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh petition. With the above observations, the application and petition stand disposed of.”

5. The appellant sent legal notice dated 20.2.2001 through his advocate for grant of consequential benefits but the same was rejected vide letter dated 4.4.2001. Thereupon, he filed Contempt Petition No. 151/2001. The learned Single Judge noted that the appellant had already been reinstated and a sum of Rs.11,48,625/- were paid to him by way of arrears of pay and allowances and directed the non-petitioner in the contempt petition to consider his case for grant of such benefits to which he may be found entitled. The learned Single Judge also made it clear that if the appellant feels aggrieved by the decision of the competent authority then he shall be free to avail appropriate legal remedy.

6. In the meanwhile, the appellant was served with memorandum dated 11.3.2002 and was called upon to explain as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him under Article 81(b) of the Education Code on six allegations, three of which related to misbehaviour with girl students. The Enquiry Officer/Summary Enquiry Committee submitted report dated 9.4.2002 with the finding that allegations leveled against the appellant have been proved. After considering the Enquiry Report, the Commissioner issued memorandum dated 31.3.2003 proposing to pass final order under Article 81(b) of the Education Code and gave opportunity to the appellant to make representation in the context of the findings recorded against him. The appellant submitted detailed representation dated 15.4.2003 to contest the findings recorded in the Enquiry Report. After considering the same, the Commissioner, KVS passed order dated 5.11.2003 and terminated the appellant’s service with immediate effect.

7. The appellant challenged memorandum dated 31.3.2003 by filing an application under Section 19 of th