Court Decision
Subject : Employment Law - Disciplinary Actions
In a significant ruling, the Hon’ble Mr.
The applicant argued that his removal from service was unjust, as it was based on a conviction that was later overturned. He sought back wages from June 14, 2013, to October 16, 2019, and full salary from his reinstatement on October 17, 2019, until his retirement on July 31, 2020. The respondents contended that the applicant's conviction warranted his removal and that he was not entitled to back wages for the intervening period, citing the principle of 'No Work No Pay'.
The court analyzed the arguments presented by both parties, emphasizing the importance of the applicant's conduct leading to his conviction. It noted that the applicant's acquittal was based on a compromise and did not exonerate him from the charges in a manner that would automatically entitle him to back wages. However, the court recognized that the applicant was entitled to salary from the date of his reinstatement until his retirement, as he had served without misconduct during that period.
The court partially allowed the applicant's plea, directing the respondents to pay the applicant his salary from October 17, 2019, until his retirement on July 31, 2020. However, it denied the claim for back wages for the period of removal, affirming the respondents' decision based on the principle of 'No Work No Pay'. The ruling underscores the complexities of employment law in cases involving criminal convictions and reinstatement.
#EmploymentLaw #LegalRights #CourtJudgment #CentralAdministrativeTribunal
No Historic Record of Saraswati Temple Demolition, Muslim Body Tells MP High Court in Bhojshala Dispute
30 Apr 2026
No Absolute Bar on Simultaneous Parole/Furlough for Co-Accused Under Delhi Prisons Rules: Delhi High Court
30 Apr 2026
Rejection of Jurisdiction Plea under Section 16 Arbitration Act Not Challengeable under Section 34 Till Final Award: Supreme Court
30 Apr 2026
'Living Separately' Under Section 13B HMA Means Cessation Of Marital Obligations, Regardless Of Residence: Patna High Court
30 Apr 2026
Consolidated SCNs under Sections 73/74 CGST Act Permissible Across Multiple FYs: Karnataka HC
01 May 2026
Allahabad HC Stays NCLT Principal Bench Order Mandating Joint Scrutiny of Allahabad Bench Filings
01 May 2026
Bombay HC Grants Interim Protection from Arrest Despite Pending Anticipatory Bail in Lower Court Due to Accused's Marriage: Sections 351(2), 64(2)(m), 74 IPC
01 May 2026
Heavy Machinery Barred in Mining Leases Except Dredging: Uttarakhand HC Directs DM to Enforce Rule 29(17) of Minor Mineral Rules
01 May 2026
No Deemed Confirmation After Probation Without Written Order Under Model Standing Orders Clause 4A: Bombay High Court
01 May 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.