Page 1

JUDGMENT

1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11325 OF 2011

Shobha Ram Raturi

..Appellant

versus

Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited and others ..Respondents

O R D E R

It is not a matter of dispute, that the appellant was

retired from service on 31.12.2002, even though he would have, in

the ordinary course, attained his date of retirement on

superannuation, only on 31.12.2005. The appellant assailed the

order of his retirement dated 31.12.2002 by filing writ petition

no. 751 of 2003. The same was allowed by a learned Single Judge of

the Punjab and Haryana High Court, on 14.09.2010. The operative

part of the order is extracted hereunder:

“Accordingly the present writ petition is allowed;

order dated 31.12.2002 (Annexure P-4) is quashed.

The petitioner would be treated to be in continuous

service with all consequential benefits. However it

is clarified that since the petitioner has not

worked on the post maxim of “no work, no pay” shall

apply and the consequential benefits shall only be

determined towards terminal benefits. However

there will be no order as to costs.”

The denial of back w