9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (10) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was fault on the part of the employer in not following the principle of natural justice. These relevant facts were considered and the learned Single Judge and also the Division Bench ordered the payment of back wages. We do not think this is a fit case where the Fundamental Rule 54 could have been invoked by the authorities. We find no merit in the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. - - - - - Dated:- 28-10-2003 - K Balakrishnan A Lakshmanan, JJ. ORDER 1. Union of India challenges the order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Patna. Respondent Madhusudan Prasad was a Safai Karamchari in CRPF. In the year 1994 he proceeded on leave and he should have reported for duty on 31.3.1994. Even after the expiry o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y for the period he was out of service. 3. Aggrieved by this order, Union of India preferred LPA before the Division Bench, but the Division bench disposed of the matter affirming the order passed by the learned Single Judge and hence this appeal by way of SLP. 4. We heard the counsel for the Union of India and it was submitted that the respondent was not entitled to get salary for the period from 7.11.1994 to 15.2.1996 in view of the order passed by the appellate authority. It was submitted that the Fundamental Rule 54 enables the Government to pass such an order and it was argued in appropriate case. The authorities can pass an order denying salary to the employee when reinstatement is ordered as a result of appeal or review. Fundamen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mately ordered, should invariably be left to be decided by the authority concerned according to law, after the culmination of the proceeding and depending on the final outcome. If the employee succeeds in the fresh enquiry and is directed to be reinstated, the authority should be at liberty to decide according to law how it will treat the period from the date of dismissal till the reinstatement and to what benefits, if any and the extent of the benefits, he will be entitled. The reinstatement made as a result of the setting aside or the enquiry for failure to furnish the report, should be treated as a reinstatement for the purpose of holding the fresh enquiry from the stage of furnishing the report and no more, wherein such fresh inquiry is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
