Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Pandurang Karuji Titarmare, was appointed as an Agriculture Assistant with the Government of Maharashtra. During his service, he was issued a show cause notice on 03.06.2004 alleging misappropriation and was placed under suspension on 22.11.2004. A charge-sheet was served on him on 13.04.2005 under Rule 8 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1981. After an enquiry, he was found guilty and dismissed from service on 07.12.2006, with a recovery of Rs.2,28,240/-. His departmental appeal was dismissed. He challenged the dismissal before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur, in Original Application No. 639 of 2009. The Tribunal, by judgment dated 28.04.2016, held that the charges of misappropriation were not proved and set aside the punishment. The Tribunal directed reinstatement from the date of termination, refund of recovery, and continuity of service for pensionary benefits, but denied pay and allowances for the period he was out of service. The State challenged the Tribunal's order in Writ Petition No. 6646 of 2016, which was dismissed by the High Court on 12.12.2019. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition challenging the denial of pay and allowances. The High Court considered the principle that when a dismissal is set aside and the employee is reinstated with continuity of service, the employee is entitled to full back wages unless there is a specific finding that the employee was not ready and willing to work. Since the dismissal was found to be without justification, the petitioner was entitled to pay and allowances for the entire period of absence. The High Court allowed the petition, setting aside the Tribunal's order to the extent it denied pay and allowances, and directed the respondents to pay the petitioner full pay and allowances for the period from the date of dismissal to the date of reinstatement, within three months.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Back Wages - Entitlement to Pay and Allowances - Maharashtra Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1981 - The petitioner, an Agriculture Assistant, was dismissed from service on charges of misappropriation. The Tribunal set aside the dismissal holding charges not proved and directed reinstatement with continuity of service but denied pay and allowances for the period of absence. The High Court held that once the dismissal is set aside and the employee is reinstated with continuity of service, the principle of 'no work no pay' does not apply, and the employee is entitled to full pay and allowances for the period of absence, as the dismissal was found to be without justification. (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pay and allowances for the period he was out of service after his dismissal was set aside by the Tribunal.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Tribunal's order to the extent it denied pay and allowances, and directed the respondents to pay the petitioner full pay and allowances for the period from the date of dismissal to the date of reinstatement within three months.
Law Points
- No work no pay
- pay and allowances for period of absence when dismissal set aside
- reinstatement with continuity of service
- entitlement to full back wages
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules
- 1981
