JUDGMENT :

The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to provide him full backwages with benefit of continuity of service for the period of idleness for computation of final payment from date of dismissal i.e., 29.11.2004 from the service till 18.10.2014, the date of his reinstatement in the service.

2. As per the factual matrix, the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner while working under the respondent to the post of U.C. Loader, having U.M.No.689074 at Lakhimata Colliery, a criminal case being S.T. Case No.17/98 under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code was instituted against him and was convicted in terms of the judgment dated 20.12.2000 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad. Thereafter, he was dismissed from the service vide order dated 29.10.2004 by the respondents after holding a departmental enquiry on the charge that petitioner was convicted for a criminal offence involving moral turpitute by a Competent Criminal Court, which 2 constitutes act of misconduct on the part of the petitioner. However, the petitioner being aggrieved by the order of conviction dated, 20.12.2000, preferred an Appeal being Criminal Appeal No.33/2001 before this Court and the said appeal was allowed, by setting aside the order of conviction and sentence and petitioner was acquitted vide order dated 15.05.2006. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner respresented before the respondents for reconsideration of the matter and withdrawal of order of his dismissal from service and also to reinstate him in service, since the charge on which the Disciplinary Proceeding was initiated against the petitioner being his conviction by the learned Trial Court, has been set aside and as such, there was no substance of charge surviving against the petitioner. Since the respondents were sitting tight over the matter, the petitioner earlier approached this Court by filing a writ petition being W.P.(S) No.7009 of 2007, which was disposed of vide order dated 14.10.2009, with a direction upon the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Disciplinary Authority for re-consideration of the earlier order of his dismissal from service and respondents were directed to pass an appropriate decision. Accordingly, an office order dated 18.10.2014, allowing the joining of the petitioner has been issued by the respondents with certain terms and conditions, wherein it was mentioned that the petitioner shall be reinstated in services without any back wages and without continuity in service and he will not be allowed the benefit of continuity of service for the period of his idleness for computation of his final payment. However, the petitioner under compulsion joined his duties. Since the petitioner was not granted the benefits of any backwages and continuity in service and also benefit of continuity of service for the period of his idleness for computation of his final gratuity payment, he has been constrained to knock the door of this Court.

3. Mr. Kalyan Banerjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that though the joining of the petitioner has been accepted, but he was denied the salary for the period from dismissal to reinstatement. He further submits that as per Clause 3 & 7 of the terms and conditions of the appointment letter, the petitioner will not be given the benefit of back wages and continuity in service as also benefit of continuity of service for the period 3 of his idleness for computation of his final gratuity payment, which is not tenable in the eyes law since the petitioner has been absolved from the charges in the criminal case, which is the basis of dismissal and as such, he is entitled for entire monetary benefits.

4. Per contra, counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents. Mr. Rajesh Lala, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents vehemently opposes the contention advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that p