JUDGMENT :

1. The matter has been heard with the consent of learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing. There is no complaint about any audio and visual quality.

I.A. No. 1163 of 2020

2. This interlocutory application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay of 145 days in preferring this Letters Patent Appeal.

3. Heard.

4. No counter affidavit has been filed opposing the prayer for condoning the delay.

5. Having regard to the averments made in this application, we are of the view that the appellants were prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the period of limitation.

6. Accordingly, I.A. No. 1163 of 2020 is allowed and delay of 145 days in preferring the appeal is condoned.

L.P.A. No. 80 of 2020

7. The instant intra-court appeal is under Clause-10 of Letters Patent directed against the order/judgment dated 13.08.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (S) No. 532 of 2011, whereby and whereunder, the writ petition has been allowed with a direction upon the respondent State to pay the arrears of salary for the period from 25.08.2001 to 12.01.2009 within the stipulated period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

8. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, required to be enumerated, are as hereunder:

The writ petitioner was found to be successful in the process of recruitment, in terms of the advertisement being Advertisement No. 1/98. His height was measured at the time of recruitment as 169.5 cm. He was appointed on preferential basis as he was possessing Home Guard Training Certificate. The respondent authorities, on the basis of complaint made by one successful candidate, namely, Bhagwan Mahto, re-measured the height of the writ petitioner, wherein, it was found to be 167.5 cm. The respondent authorities, in consequence of the same, has initiated a disciplinary proceeding by issuing memorandum of charge which ultimately culminated into proving of charge against the writ petitioner of committing the irregularities in the measurement of his height for the purpose of getting appointment as Constable. The Disciplinary Authority, while accepting the finding recorded by the enquiry officer, has inflicted punishment of dismissal from service, vide, order as contained in memo no. 1942 dated 25.08.2001. The writ petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Headquarter, Jharkhand at Ranchi on 06.09.2001 but the same was rejected vide order dated 01.02.2003.

The writ petitioner, being aggrieved with the order passed by the Administrative Authority has preferred a writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 1659 of 2003 which was disposed of vide order dated 05.12.2008, whereby and whereunder, the order dated 25.08.2001, by which, the writ petitioner was dismissed from service, has been quashed by allowing the writ petition. The writ petitioner, thereafter, has filed a representation dated 19.12.2008 for acceptance of his joining. The respondent authorities have allowed the writ petitioner to be reinstated in service but only annual increment was calculated and fixed from 01.05.2001 to 01.05.2008 but no order was passed with respect to arrears of salary.

The writ petitioner, being aggrieved with such decision of having not passed any order of back wages for the intervening period i.e. from 25.08.2001 to 12.01.2009, has again preferred a writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 532 of 2011.

The respondents have appeared and filed counter affidavit denying the claim by taking the plea that on the basis of the principle of “no work no pay” and as also, since there is no direction by this Court while disposing of the writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 1659 of 2003 about the disbursement of the salary for the aforesaid intervening period, the writ petitioner is not entitled to get the arrears of salary for the said period.

The learned Single Judge, after considering