High Court Dismisses Writ Petition for Salary Disbursement Due to Acceptance of Reinstatement Terms. The petitioner accepted reinstatement terms which classified the dismissal period as extraordinary leave, thus forfeiting salary for that period.

High Court: Madras High Court
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved a writ petition filed by the legal heirs of R. Subramanian against the Puducherry Housing Board, seeking to quash an order dated 04.07.2017 and to direct the Board to disburse salary and benefits for a period of 31 months during which the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner had worked for the Puducherry Housing Board for 29 years and was dismissed on 10.05.2010 without any charge or inquiry, allegedly due to retaliation for exposing misconduct. He was reinstated on 13.12.2012, with the reinstatement order specifying that the period of dismissal would be treated as extraordinary leave. After retirement on 31.01.2013, the petitioner sought to have the dismissal period recognized as duty and requested salary for that time. The Board countered that the petitioner had not challenged the reinstatement order and thus could not claim any relief. The court noted that the petitioner had accepted the reinstatement terms and had received all retirement benefits, and that the rejection of subsequent representations did not create a cause of action. Ultimately, the court found no legal grounds to interfere with the Board's order and dismissed the writ petition without costs.

Headnote

A) Employment Law - Dismissal and Reinstatement - Acceptance of Reinstatement Terms - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The petitioner accepted the reinstatement order which treated the dismissal period as extraordinary leave, thus forfeiting salary for that period. The court held that the petitioner cannot claim salary for the period of dismissal after accepting the terms of reinstatement (Paras 6-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to salary and benefits for the period of dismissal after accepting reinstatement terms.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court dismissed the writ petition, finding no legal grounds to interfere with the order dated 04.07.2017, and stated there would be no order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus
  • dismissal without charge
  • extraordinary leave
  • Central Civil Service (Leave) Rules
  • 1972
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (09) 22

WP No. 18733 of 2018

2026-09-29

Mr.Justice Krishnaswamy Govindarajan

M/s.S.P.Vijayaraghavan, Mr.T.M.Naveen

R.Subramanian (deceased), Tmt.Dhanam, Tmt.Sumathy, Thiru.Jayamani

The Secretary to Government, Puducherry Housing Board

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging an order regarding salary disbursement.

Remedy Sought

Petitioners sought to quash an order and direct salary disbursement.

Filing Reason

Petitioner claimed wrongful dismissal and sought recognition of the dismissal period as duty.

Previous Decisions

The order dated 13.12.2012 reinstating the petitioner was not challenged.

Issues

Entitlement to salary during extraordinary leave Validity of the reinstatement order

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued for salary recognition for the dismissal period Respondent contended that the reinstatement order was accepted and unchallenged

Ratio Decidendi

The acceptance of reinstatement terms that classified the dismissal period as extraordinary leave precluded the petitioner from claiming salary for that period.

Judgment Excerpts

The period from the date of dismissal till the date of his joining duty will be treated as extra-ordinary leave. The rejection of the representation(s), as it is, will not give rise to any cause of action.

Procedural History

The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging an order from the Puducherry Housing Board regarding salary disbursement.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
  • Central Civil Service (Leave) Rules: Rule 26, Rule 40
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal by Central Bureau of Investigation in Foreign Contribution Regulation Act Case — High Court's Quashing of FIR Set Aside. The High Court's findings were deemed premature and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appellant in Octroi Duty Dispute Due to Non-Passing of Burden. Refund Ordered as Excess Duty Collected Without Justification Under Maharashtra Municipalities Act, 1965.