Civil Revision No. 4331 of 2008 (1)
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
Civil Revision No. 4331 of 2008 (O&M)
Date of decision : 19.1.2009
State of Punjab and another ..... Petitioners
vs
Amrik Singh ..... Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. B. B. S. Teji, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.
Mr. S. K. Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Challenge in the present petition is to the order passed by the
learned Executing Court whereby the objections filed by the petitioners
were dismissed.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that the respondent filed suit
for declaration challenging order of his dismissal dated 15.3.1994 being
illegal on the ground that he was never served any notice in any inquiry held
prior to the passing of the order of dismissal. The suit was decreed by the
trial court. While setting aside the order of dismissal and granting continuity
of service, it was held as if the order of dismissal had never been passed.
The judgment and decree of the courts below was modified by this court in
R. S. A. No. 2117 of 2002 vide order dated 12.12.2002 to the effect that the
petitioners were given liberty to held fresh inquiry in accordance with law.
In the fresh inquiry held vide order dated 1.10.2003, the
respondent was held not entitled to salary for the period of 191 days w.e.f.
5.9.1993 to 15.3.1994. In addition to that two years service was forfeited on
temporary basis vide order dated 1.10.2003 and absence of 191 days from
service was treated as non-duty period and consequently no work no pay.
In the execution petition filed by the respondent, the petitioners
raised objections regarding not entitlement to salary for the period in the
subsequent inquiry held as per observations made by this court in R. S. A.
No. 2117 of 2002 for the period of absence.
Civil Revision No. 4331 of 2008 (2)
Learned counsel for the respondent fairly submitted that in the
execution petition filed by him he is not claiming any salary for the period
he remained absent i.e. 191 days. His claim is for the salary for the period
from 15.3.1994 onwards as has been decreed in his favour while setting
aside the order of dismissal.
In view of this fair stand of learned counsel for the respondent,
the claim made by the petitioners in the present petition does not survive.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
19.1.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge