Reinstatement with back benefits

2024 PLC(CS) 1130 PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL Judicial Precedent

S.5Appeal before the Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service TribunalReinstatement into serviceBack benefitsEntitlement toJudicial officer was reinstated from the date of his dismissal

Representation of the appellant (reinstated judicial officer) for grant of back benefits, while treating the intervening period as period spent on duty, was declined

Stance of the appellant was that he was not employed for gain during the intervening period, rather his request to practice as an Advocate was also declined by the authority, therefore, he was entitled for grant of back benefits

Validity

Appellant had been reinstated into service from the date of his dismissal, however, the Authority did not pass any order regarding intervening period and consequent benefits

Back benefits were to be granted for the intervening period, during which an employee remained out of service and did not engage in any gainful profession

Concept of reinstatement into service with original seniority and back benefits is based on the established principle of jurisprudence that if an illegal action/wrong is struck down by the Court, as a consequence, it is also to be ensured that no undue harm is caused to any individual due to such illegality/wrong or as a result of delay in the redressal of his grievance

If, by virtue of a declaration given by the Court, a civil servant is to be treated as being still in service, he should also be given the consequential relief of the back benefits (including salary) for the period he was kept out of service as if he was actually performing duties

Grant of back benefits, in such situation, is a rule and denial of such benefits is an exception on the proof that such a person had remained gainfully employed during the intervening period

Punjab Subordinate Judiciary Service Tribunal directed the respondent (Registrar High Court) to disburse the financial back benefits of appellant

Appeal for grant of back-benefits, was allowed, in circumstances.

2023 PLC(CS)N 47 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN Judicial Precedent

Arts. 4, 10-A & 199Constitutional petitionTermination from serviceRight of individuals to be dealt in accordance with lawRight to fair trialReinstatement with back benefitsNon-issuance of show cause noticeFailure to provide opportunity of hearingScopePetitioner being an employee of respondent/Bank was performing his duties when he was transferred to another branch

Petitioner showed his inability to attend the office due to tribal enmity and eminent threat to his life, as such, filed several applications for grant of leave

Manager of the transferee branch through an 'Absence Notice' informed the petitioner that the competent authority had disregarded his leave applications and directed him to attend the office within three days

Petitioner belatedly joined his duty, filed an application for grant of leave, joining report was accepted, his application for grant of leave was forwarded to the head office with the recommendation that the leave period be treated as leave without pay, however, vide impugned memorandum, the services of the petitioner were terminated on account of unauthorized absence and the period of his absence was treated as leave without pay

Held; period of absence was already condoned and his joining report was accepted by issuing a stern warning to the petitioner, therefore, no ground was available with the Bank to terminate the petitioner

Neither any show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner nor any opportunity of hearing was afforded to him before passing the impugned office memorandum

Entire record was silent in respect of any inquiry conducted against the petitioner

Termination order and the order whereby departmental appeal was dismissed were set aside, in circumstances

Bank was directed to reinstate the petitioner into his service with all back benefits from the date of his dismissal

Constitutional petition was disposed of accordingly.

2014 GBLR 125 SUPREME-APPELLATE-COURT Judicial Precedent

Arts. 60 & 71Civil serviceDismissal from serviceReinstatement with back benefitsImplementation of order

Service of the respondent who was foot constable, were terminated by the competent Authority on the charge of having been involved in a criminal case registered against him

Departmental appeal against termination order, having been dismissed, respondent approached the Chief Court by filing writ petition for the redressal of his grievance which petition was accepted with direction to reinstate the respondent with back benefits for the period during which he had not remained gainfully employed elsewhere

Application for implementation of order passed by the Chief Court was allowed with direction to pay back benefits to the respondent

Authority feeling aggrieved, assailed the said order of Chief Court before Supreme Appellate Court contending that matter of payment of back benefits having been left to the discretion of competent Authority (by the Supreme Appellate Court in an earlier order), Chief Court could not take up the matter and thereafter direct the payment of back benefits

Held, order earlier passed by the Supreme Appellate Court reflected that Authority was only given the mandate to hold regular inquiry and the Court nowhere dealt with postponement of payment of back benefits till conclusion of inquiry, if so initiated against respondent

Respondent, in view of said judgment of Supreme Appellate Court, was entitled to recover back benefits as per orders of the Supreme Appellate Court, and no exception could be taken to the same

Interference was declined by the Supreme Appellate Court

Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed.