JUDGMENT :

S.K. Medhi, J.

The present appeal has been preferred by the State of Arunachal Pradesh and one of his Officer for setting aside and quashing the judgment and order dated 04.12.2019 passed by this Court in WP(C)/14(AP)/2015. By the aforesaid judgment, the Hon'ble Single Judge while allowing the writ petition had directed the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders on the issue of back wages to the petitioner within a period of 3(three) months.

2. Before going to the impugned judgment, the brief facts of the case may be stated in the following manner.

3. The writ petitioner is a Diploma Holder and was working as a Junior Engineer. Alleging that the petitioner and another who were Diploma Holders were given out of turn promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer, one Shri Punyo Tungu had filed WP(C)/115(AP)/2001. It was contended that Diploma Holders would come within the zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer after continuous service of eight years and on the other hand, a Graduate Engineer requires five years length of service as Junior Engineer. The aforesaid writ petition was allowed vide order dated 23.03.2004 by interfering with the recommendation of the DPC and the consequent promotion of the petitioner dated 30.03.2021. The aforesaid case was however decided ex-parte the petitioner.

4. Coming to know about the said position, the writ petitioner preferred WA/8(AP)/2007 by taking leave from the Appellate Court. The said writ appeal was allowed vide order dated 25.04.2011 by holding that the petitioner was entitled to notice and on that ground alone, the impugned judgment dated 23.03.2004 was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the learned Single Judge.

5. Upon such remand, WP(C)/115(AP)/2001 was taken up afresh and vide order dated 06.12.2012 the writ petition was dismissed. It was held that when the vacancies arose in the year 1997, the relevant Recruitment Rules was applicable under which the petitioner was a Technical Assistant and by the time the DPC had sat, the petitioner had already completed three years of qualifying service. It further transpires that the order dated 06.12.2013 of dismissal of the writ petition was challenged in the Hon’ble Division Bench by filing writ appeal No. 1(AP)/ 2013 which vide order dated 08.05.2014 dismissed the same and upheld the order of the learned Single Judge dated 06.12.2013.

6. Before the aforesaid judgment on remand was delivered, as per the order dated 23.03.2004 the writ petitioner was reverted from the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) vide order dated 31.05.2004. However, after the dismissal of the writ petition on remand (subsequently confirmed by the Hon’ble Division Bench vide order dated 08.05.2014) the petitioner was reinstated vide order dated 20.12.2013. While reinstating the petitioner to the promoted post of Assistant Engineer, no arrears were allowed for the intervening period of 31.05.2004 to June, 2007. Accordingly, the petitioner had instituted the present writ petition being WP(C)/14(AP)/2015.

7. The writ petitioner contended that for no fault of his, he has to suffer because of an order passed by this Court which was however interfered with by the Hon’ble Division Bench and the matter was remanded back for a fresh decision. On such remand, the writ petition was dismissed. The said dismissal was also upheld by the Hon’ble Division Bench in WA/ 01(AP)/2013. Consequently, the petitioner cannot be deprived of the back wages.

8. The contention on the behalf of the State which had filed affidavit-in-opposition was that such prayer was barred by the principles of “No work No pay” as the petitioner admittedly did not work for the said period as Assistant Engineer.

9. After hearing, the learned Single Judge came to a finding that on the first occasion, WP(C)/115(AP)/2001 filed against the petitioner was allowed in his absence. However, on remand, the challenge to the promotion o