Judgment :

Madhuresh Prasad, J.

1. Heard the learned senior advocate for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The petitioner was proceeded against on an allegation of having obtained employment in the respondent organization on the basis of a manufactured caste certificate bearing No. 1316/88, dated 19.12.1988 purported to be issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Asansol. The petitioner unsuccessfully faced the proceeding and thereafter assailed the outcome.The writ petitioner relied upon the enquiry report, but assailed the findings of the Disciplinary Authority dated 05.10.2005 whereby and whereunder, the petitioner was dismissed from service. In an earlier writ proceeding W.P. 21536 (W) of 2005 the Writ Court was of the view that the petitioner was denied a fair opportunity of hearing.

3. The order of the Disciplinary Authority was set aside by the Writ Court keeping the respondents’ option open to take steps pursuant to the enquiry report in accordance with law. A time frame was specified by the Writ Court.

4. Thereafter,the Disciplinary Authority served a disagreement notice on the petitioner differing with the findings of the Enquiry Officer. The petitioner was afforded an opportunity to make his comment on the disagreement note. The petitioner was also allowed a personal hearing by the Disciplinary Authority. In the course of personal hearing on 02.04.2014 the Disciplinary Authority considering the submissions of the writ petitioner, allowed the petitioner an opportunity to counter the contents of the Memo No. 1965/G dated 17.12.2003 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Asansol (Burdwan). By this letter, the SDO had stated that the caste certificate relied upon by the writ petitioner at the time of obtaining the appointment was not issued by his office and that it was a manufactured one.

5. Thereafter, the petitioner was directed by a communication dated 02.04.2014 from the Assistant General Manager to produce a fresh caste certificate from the appropriate authority to substantiate his claim as a member of the Scheduled Tribe category. The petitioner submitted the caste certificate dated 25.06.2011 which was obtained by him during pendency of the proceeding being conducted against him. Upon receipt of such caste certificate the petitioner was allowed to resume his duties by an order dated 08.07.2014 issued under the signature of the Deputy General Manager (R) of the respondent Corporation. The relevant extract of the order of the Deputy General Manager reads:

“AND WHEREAS, in consideration of the submissions made by Shri Anil Kumar Prasad before the then General Manager (R) during the personal hearing held on 02.04.2014, a fresh scheduled Tribe Certificate obtained by Shri Prasad from the office of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Asansol (Burdwan), under certificate No. 3784/2011 vide Page No. 2284 dated 25.06.2011 to substantiate his caste status, was submitted by Shri Prasad on 08.04.2014

AND WHEREAS, Shri Anil Kumar Prasad vide letter dated 27.03.2014 has prayed for allowing him to resume duty.

NOW THEREFORE, the undersigned in exercise of the powers conferred under Regulation 66(4) of FCI (Staff) Regulations) 1971, hereby allows Shri Anil Kumar Prasad to resume his duties as Assistant Grade III (Depot). Shri Anil Kumar Prasad is directed to report to the Area Manager, FCI, Durgapur for further posting. Also Shri Anil Kumar Prasad is reinstated as AG III(D)) with immediate effect.

It is further ordered that the period from the date of dismissal order of Shri Anil Kumar Prasad, i.e. from 05.10.2005 till the date of the Hon’ble High Court’s order, i.e. 29.1.2014 is treated as period under deemed suspension and the suspension period may be regularized by granting leave due or EOL and the period from 30.01.2014 till the date of reinstatement is treated as period spent on duty, without any back wages, since Shri Prasad has not rendered any service to the Corporation during the material period.”

6. Subsequentl