LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
The Indian Constitution Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Kumar Doab (FIN)     20 September 2012

If decision of his termination wrong, the employee will be e

Dear Members and Experts,

Copy of the Supreme Court Judgement is required. Kindly post the same.

"In a judgment that may have far reaching consequences, the Supreme Court has ruled that if an employee is compulsorily retired and later reinstated after finding the decision of his termination wrong, the employee will be entitled to back-wages for the period during the termination of his services."

 

Fired then hired employees entitled to salary of lay-off period, rules apex court

DECISION COMES ON A PETITION FILED BY EX-UNDER SECY, DHBVN, WHO HAD TO RETIRE FOLLOWING AN ACR CASTING ASPERSION ON HIS INTEGRITY

CHANDIGARH: In a judgment that may have far reaching consequences, the Supreme Court has ruled that if an employee is compulsorily retired and later reinstated after finding the decision of his termination wrong, the employee will be entitled to back-wages for the period during the termination of his services.

The decision came from a bench comprising justice Altamas Kabir and justice J Chelameswar on a petition filed by Ram Kishan, former under secretary (legal), Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam.

Kishan, who had joined services in 1974 as a clerk, had subsequently reached the post of under secretary and was compulsorily retired from service in November 2003, following an annual confidential report (ACR) casting aspersion on his integrity. The petitioner was to superannuate on February 28, 2006.

However, when Kishan approached the Punjab and Haryana high court, he was reinstated in February 2009 by the high court after a gap of six years from his termination with all the consequential benefits except back-wages for the period that he was not working.

In the meantime, his immediate junior officer, Poonam Bhasin, was allowed higher grade and promoted as officiating legal remembrancer/joint secretary (legal).

Not satisfied with the single judge order, he again moved before the division bench of the high court but the division bench did not find it necessary to interfere with the view taken by single judge.

Kishan then approached the Supreme Court and submitted that he was entitled for the wages for the period for which he had not worked. He justified that he had been prevented from performing his job, not because he did not wish to work, but because he had been retired from service on a ground, which had been found to be malafide and biased by the high court.

The apex court found that the adverse entries were made in Kishan’s ACR with malafide intent on account of his complaints against senior officers and the decision of his compulsory retirement was biased. The complaints (against superior officers) ultimately did not turn out to be frivolous, held the apex court.



Learning

 9 Replies

KCS Kutty, Pune (FACULTY)     21 September 2012

Thank you for sharing this valuable information. 

 

K C S Kutty

Kumar Doab (FIN)     21 September 2012

Learned experts/.members are requested to provide copy of this Supreme Court Judgment.

Kumar Doab (FIN)     25 September 2012

The judgements by HC before the decision of Supreme Court are enclosed.

The judgement of SC in this matter is required.Kindly post the same.


Attached File : 64955869 ram kishan vs dakshin haryana bijli vitran ... on 10 august, 2009.pdf, 64955869 ram kishan vs dakshin haryana bijli vitran ... on 10 february, 2009.pdf downloaded: 226 times

Kumar Doab (FIN)     25 September 2012

Publication in the newspaper is also attached.

All experts/members are requested to provide the SC judgement.


Attached File : 64955869 sc judgement hindustan times (chandigarh)(2012-09-16) page5.pdf downloaded: 110 times

Adv k . mahesh (advocate)     26 November 2012

after searching total supreme court website i found only this order and it is not complete ITEM NO.36 COURT NO.2 SECTION IVB S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).32108/2009 (From the judgement and order dated 10/08/2009 in LPA No. 542/2009 & CMP No.3954/2004 of The HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH) RAM KISHAN Petitioner(s) VERSUS DAKSHIN HARYANA BIJLI VITRN.NIGM.LD.&ORS Respondent(s) (With office report ) Date: 07/07/2011 This Petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALTAMAS KABIR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CYRIAC JOSEPH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR For Petitioner(s) Ms. Indu Malhotra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vivek Jain, Adv. Ms. Durga Devi, Adv. Ms. Anusha Nagarajan, Adv. Mr. Vikas Mehta, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Ashok K. Mahajan, Adv. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following O R D E R On the prayer made on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 3, time to file counter affidavit is extended by a period of four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed within four weeks thereafter. (Chetan Kumar) (Juginder Kaur) Court Master Assistant Registrar

Kumar Doab (FIN)     26 November 2012

Dear Mr Mahesh,

Many Thanks for your post.

The publication in the press was found as very good and hence we started collecting the background.

If the judgement as mentioned in the news paper publication is  delivered it shall have far reaching consequences and shall benefit many.

Kumar Doab (FIN)     05 December 2012

Valuable advice of learned experts/members is sought on how to get the clerical error removed and how to get the current status and copy of judgement.

The judgement as published in the press shall be immensely useful for many of the employees and shall have far reaching consequences.

Rajan Salvi (Lawyer)     09 December 2012

Apply for certified copy with affidavit.

Kumar Doab (FIN)     13 December 2012

Many thanks to Mr. Shri Gopal Soni for his initiative and effort.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query