Reinstated employees are entitled to count the dismissal period towards continuous service and receive corresponding benefits unless expressly limited by the reinstatement order.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. Mishra, J.

This writ petition has been preferred by the Petitioner with the following prayers.

“PRAYER

Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to admit this writ petition and issue a ‘Rule-Nisi’ calling upon the Opposite Parties to show cause as to why the Opposite parties shall not be directed to pay the balance arrear salary of the petitioner with effect from 01.09.2010 till date and thereafter per month regularly by taking into consideration the appointment of the petitioner in regular service with effect from 01.07.1994 and to clear up the balance arrear amount within a fixed period and if the Opposite Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause make the said rule absolute”

2. The factual matrix, which led to filing of the present writ petition, is that the Petitioner was engaged as daily wager by the Chairman, Regulated Market Committee, Dunguripali along with five others. Vide order dated 01.07.1994, the services of the Petitioner and others were regularized as Yardman in the scale of pay of Rs.800-15-1010-EB120-1150/-. After regularization of his service, a departmental proceeding was initiated against him. He was dismissed from service with effect from 01.04.1997. Being aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, the Petitioner preferred O.J.C. No.9627 of 1997. This Court, vide order date 01.05.2006, had been pleased to quash the said order of dismissal as the same was passed by the Opposite Party-Employer without any enquiry and providing an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. However, because of the observation made in the said order dated 01.05.2006, passed in O.J.C. No. 9627 of 1997, a fresh article of charge was issued against the Petitioner and an Enquiry Officer was appointed to enquire in to the matter, who submitted his report finding the Petitioner guilty. However, without giving any second show cause notice, punishment was imposed on the Petitioner vide letter dated 27.08.2010 (Annexure-2), which is extracted below:

REGULATED MARKET COMMITTEE, DUNGURIPALI

At/PO-Dunguripali, Dist: Subarnapur-767023 (Orissa)

Ref NO.345

Date: 27.08.2010

ORDER

After careful consideration of the matter in the Committee Meeting of RMC, Dunguripali held on 17/08/2010 & basing on the previous order of the Ex-Chairman, Sri Gandaram Bhoi, Ex-Yardman of RMC, Dunguripali is hereby reinstated in his service with effect from 01.09.2010 with imposing of following punishment.

1) He will not be entrusted with duties related to financial matter.

2) He is imposed penalty of Rs.5,000/- which to be realized in 05(five) installments.

3) The period of removal is treated as suspension as such By order of Chairman Sd/-

By order of Chairman
Sd/-
Secretary
R.M.C., Dunguripali”
(Emphasis supplied)

3. Even though, vide order dated 27.08.2010, it was ordered that period of removal of the Petitioner is to be treated as suspension as such, in view of non- payment of subsistence allowance, the Petitioner was constrained to approach this Court again in W.P.(C) No.9531 of 2012, which was disposed of vide order dated 12.09.2013 directing the Opposite Parties-Employers to pay subsistence allowance to the Petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the said order. After his reinstatement with effect from 01.09.2010, his past period of service, i.e., from 01.04.1997 till the date of his reinstatement, was not counted for the purpose of continuous service and he was not paid his revised salary at par with other co