Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 2021
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A), Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)
Papendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Police – Respondent
OA|OA No. 1815/2023|W.P.(C) No. 9894/2023|OA No. 2245/2022|OA No. 2120/2022|OA No. 1767/2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Rhea Verma with Ms. Kavita Chaturvedi
For the Respondents: Mr. Sona Kumar
FR 17(1) and 'no work no pay' apply to deny backwages on reinstatement where termination quashed for trivial concealment despite criminal conviction, distinguishing from exoneration cases.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 - Rule 5 - Fundamental Rules - FR 17(1) - Service law - Reinstatement after termination for concealment of criminal FIR and conviction with fine in attestation form - Tribunal quashed termination considering trivial nature of offence but neither directed nor implied entitlement to backwages - Intervening period treated as spent on duty for continuity, seniority, notional increment but without backwages applying 'no work no pay' principle under FR 17(1) - Normal rule of backwages in wrongful termination not applicable where employee at fault for concealment despite conviction - FR 17(1) applicable as employee did not discharge duties during period, fault attributable to own actions - Distinction from cases of acquittal, benefit of doubt or no knowledge of FIR - Denial of backwages justified with recorded reasons. (Paras 7.1, 7.4, 7.5, 8)
(B) Service law - Backwages - Burden on employer to prove gainful employment only where reinstatement follows finding of no fault or illegal termination without employee culpability - Where termination set aside on leniency despite proved concealment and conviction, backwages not automatic - 'No work no pay' applies sans exceptions like sealed cover exoneration. (Paras 4.2, 7.3, 7.4)
Facts of the case:
Applicant, provisionally appointed as constable, terminated for concealing FIR and court fine for property defacement. Tribunal quashed termination for trivial offence/non-disclosure weightage, directing reinstatement with consequential benefits. High Court upheld. Respondents reinstated treating intervening period (termination to rejoining) as on duty for seniority/continuity/notional benefits but denied backwages/arrears citing FR 17(1) as no duties performed.
Findings of Court:
FR 17(1) correctly applied; no infirmity in denial of backwages given employee's fault in conviction and concealment; prior orders distinguished as involving acquittals/no knowledge unlike present conviction.
Issues: Entitlement to backwages post-reinstatement where termination quashed despite concealment of criminal conviction; applicability of FR 17(1) and 'no work no pay' in such cases.
Ratio Decidendi: Reinstatement with consequential benefits does not mandate backwages where employee convicted, fined and concealed facts; FR 17(1) enforces 'no work no pay' absent exoneration or employer fault; leniency in quashing termination does not entitle monetary benefits for non-work period.
Result: Original Application dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of employment, fir concealment, termination, and reinstatement. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. entitlement to backwages on wrongful termination reinstatement. (Para 4) |
| 3. fr 17(1) applies: no work, no pay for non-duty period. (Para 5) |
| 4. ccs rule 5 inapplicable post-reinstatement innocence. (Para 6) |
| 5. prior tribunal quashed termination due to trivial offense concealment. (Para 7) |
| 6. oa dismissed; no backwages granted. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
ORDER
By Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)
Present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief:
“(i) Direct the Respondents to set aside and quash order dated 23.08.2024 to the extent it has denied the Applicant backwages and arrears from 07.07.2022 to date of reinstatement, i.e. 04.07.2024; and award all consequential benefits, including continuity of service, seniority, arrears of pay, fixation of pay at par with other similarly placed, to the Applicant; and
(ii) Any other or further order as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit.”
2. Factual Matrix
2.1 The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was employed with the respondents as Constable (Exe.) (Male) in Delhi Police. He joined the basic training at Delhi Police Academy, Jharoda Kalan, New Delhi provisionally on 14.03.2022. While the respondents undertook the verification of the his character and antecedents, they found that one FIR No. 591/2018 dated 15.10.2018 u/s 3 & 6 of Rajasthan Property Defacement Act, 2006 was filed against him. The Court of ACMN No. 2, Jaipur gave him the benefit under Section 3 of the P.O. Act and imposed a fine of Rs.500/-. The respondents from the scrutiny of records found that the applicant has concealed the pendency of aforementioned FIR against him and accordingly, vide order dated 27.07.2023 terminated him from the service. Aggrieved, the applicant filed OA No. 1815/2023 before this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide order dated 23.05.2023 allowed the OA and directed the respondents to reinstate the applicant in service along with all consequential benefits. The respondents challenged the said order before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No. 9894/2023 and the High Court of Delhi vide order dated 13.05.2023 dismissed the said Writ Petition. In compliance of the High Court decision, the respondents vide order dated 23.08.2024 passed the following order:
“In pursuance of the judgment dated 13.05.2024 passed by the Bench of Hon'ble Ms. Justice Rekha Palli and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee, Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P. (C) 9894/2023 & CM APPL. 38069/2023 - titled C.P., Delhi & Anr. Vs. Papendra Singh as well as opinion of LA to CP, Delhi the intervening period from 07.07.2022 (from date of termination) to the date of re- Instate i.e. 04.07.2024 is hereby decided as spent on duty for all intents and purposes but without back wages and arrears. However, he will be granted notional increment for the period as mentioned above during which he has not performed his duty as R/Ct. (Exe.). During this period, he will not be entitled to draw any arrears of pay and allowance as per FR-17 (1), which speaks that an officer shall begin to draw pay and allowances attached to his tenure of a post with effect from the date when he assumes the duties of that post, and shall cease to draw them as soon as he cease to discharge those duties." However, this period will, otherwise, count towards fixation of his seniority.”
2.2 The respondents allowed the applicant to rejoin the service. Accordingly, the applicant rejoined the service on 04.07.2024. As the respondents did not give appropriate wages and arrears of pay, the applicant filed the present OA seeking aforementioned reliefs.
3. Notices were issued to the respondents and they have filed their counter reply, to which the applicant has also filed his rejoinder.
4. Submissions by Learned Counsel for the Applicant
4.1 Learned counsel for applicant submi
