Reinstatement restores all benefits, including upgradation, despite the absence of backwages for the period out of service.

JUDGMENT :

PER Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

I.A. No.11639 of 2023

1) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and being satisfied with the grounds shown, the delay of 74 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned.

2) I.A. No. 11639 of 2023 stands allowed and disposed of.

L.P.A. No. 257 of 2023

3) This intra-court appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated 19.01.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 1687 of 2021, whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the appellant for grant of upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme by quashing Memo No.1848 dated 29.10.2018, has been dismissed on the ground that the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.1809 of 2018 has denied the backwages or benefits of the period of discontinuity in service.

FACTS

4) Brief facts, as per the pleadings made in the writ petition, are as under:-

4.1) The appellant was appointed as Constable on 10.05.2005 in terms of the advertisement dated 13.01.2004, but he was dismissed from service vide order dated 14.10.2012 and this order of dismissal was affirmed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 07.04.2013.

The appellant being aggrieved with the dismissal orders dated 14.10.2012 and 07.04.2013 approached this Court by filing writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 3277 of 2013.

The learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 13.11.2013 while allowing the writ petition had directed the appellant to be reinstated with backwages.

The said order was challenged by the State of Jharkhand by filing L.P.A. No.328 of 2014 which was allowed by the Coordinate Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 27.01.2016.

Being aggrieved, the appellant challenged the said order by filing S.L.P. (C) No.25738 of 2016, which was converted into Civil Appeal No.1809 of 2018, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court has been pleased to set aside the judgment passed by the Coordinate Division Bench by restoring the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge. However, in the said Civil Appeal, the appellant has been found not entitled to any backwages or benefits for the period he has not served.

4.2) The appellant, after being reinstated in service and completing 10 years of service from the date of his initial appointment, claimed for grant of 1st upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme by filing representation, but the same was rejected on the ground that once the Hon’ble Apex Court has held the appellant not entitled for backwages or benefits for the period he remained out of service, the appellant cannot be said to have completed 10 years of continuous service.

4.3) Being aggrieved, the appellant approached this Court by filing the instant writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 1687 of 2021. The learned Single Judge has agreed to the reason assigned by the administrative authority while rejecting the claim and has refused to interfere with the decision taken by the administrative authority by dismissing the writ petition by a judgment dated 19.01.2023. Hence, the present appeal.

CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT

5) Mr. Shadab Bin Haque, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has raised the following grounds for assailing the impugned judgment:-

(i) The Administrative Authority has passed the order solely relying upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.1809 of 2018, wherein the order of reinstatement has been passed reversing the judgment passed by the Coordinate Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 328 of 2014, however, by making a rider that the appellant will not be entitled for backwages or benefits for the period he has not served.

(ii) The backwages or benefit for the period the appellant has not served mainly construe the monetary terms and if the entire words would be taken into consideration together, then it will be evident that the principle of ‘No Work No Pay’ will be applicable for the simple reason that the appellant has not discharged duty for the afor