LexG H CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED versus SIRAJ UDDIN KHAN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
232
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 9 S.C.R.
CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
v.
SIRAJ UDDIN KHAN
(Civil Appeal No. 5390 of 2019)
JULY 11, 2019
[ASHOK BHUSHAN AND NAVIN SINHA, JJ.]
Service Law – Payment of arrears of salary and other
benefits – Respondent-assistant typist was transferred from
Allahabad Branch to Jaunpur Branch – He did not join the said
branch and was unauthorisedly absent from 02.02.2007 –
Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him – By order dated
14.05.2009, disciplinary authority held respondent guilty of charge
of unauthorised absence – Thereafter, respondent attained the age
of superannuation on 20.06.2012 – On 26.06.2012, disciplinary
authority terminated his services – Appeal against the said order
dated 26.06.2012 was dismissed on 18.07.2014 – Writ petition was
filed by respondent against the orders dated 14.05.2009, 26.06.2012
and 18.07.2014 – Single Judge of the High Court by order dated
29.05.2015, set aside the order dated 26.06.2012 and insofar
order dated 14.05.2009 was concerned, no relief was granted to
the respondent – However, Division Bench of the High Court by
order dated 15.02.2016 quashed the order dated 14.05.2009 and
held appellant entitled to all consequential benefits – Since, the
said order of the Division Bench of the High Court was not
challenged it has become final – Thereafter, respondent filed
another writ petition praying for payment of salary from January,
2007 to June, 2012 – The Single Judge of the High Court held that
appellant was entitled for salary w.e.f. 02.02.2007 upto 14.05.2009,
since order dated 14.05.2009 was set aside by the Division Bench
of the High Court – Further, order dated 26.06.2012 was also set
aside by the Single Judge of the High Court by order dated
29.05.2015, thus, salary w.e.f. 14.05.2009 to 20.06.2012 cannot
be denied to the respondent – On appeal, held: In pursuance of the
order of the Division Bench of the High Court dated 15.02.2016,
the respondent is entitled to receive salary from 02.02.2007 to
[2019] 9 S.C.R. 232
232
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
233
14.05.2009 – Insofar claim for salary or back wages for the
period 14.05.2009 to 20.06.2012 is concerned, there is no
adjudication regarding claim of salary or back wages to the
respondent in the impugned judgment of Single Judge for the
period 14.05.2009 to 20.06.2012 – Single Judge was of the
opinion that in view of the setting aside of the order dated
26.06.2012, payment of salary is automatic, this view of the Single
Judge is not correct – The present is not a case where the
respondent was dismissed from the service and consequent to
dismissal, he could not work and when dismissal was set aside, he
will be automatically entitled for back wages – Therefore, direction
of the High Court to the appellant to make payment of salary after
14.05.2009 till 20.06.2012 set aside – Further, appellant directed
to consider the claim of respondent for back wages after 14.05.2009
to 20.06.2012.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. The issue, which has to be answered is as to
whether by setting aside of the order dated 26.06.2012, whereby
disciplinary authority terminated the service of the respondent,
the respondent was automatically entitled for back wages. A
perusal of the judgment of Single Judge dated 29.05.2015
indicates that although Single Judge has set aside the order dated
26.06.2012, but there was no order for payment of back wages or
consequential benefits. Single Judge has set aside the order dated
26.06.2012 and has left the matter there. [Para 11] [241-D-E]
2. It was after 15.11.2017 that Writ Petition No.61102 of
2017 was filed by the respondent. Thus, in the Writ Petition
No.61102 of 2017, the Single Judge was required to adjudicate
on the entitlement of respondent for payment of salary. Single
Judge has adjudicated with regard to entitlement of salary from
02.02.2007 to 14.05.2009 and issued directions thereunder. This
Court may notice that the Division Bench while setting aside the
order dated 14.05.2009 has directed for payment of
consequential benefits. [Para 13] [242-B-C]
3. There is no adjudication regarding claim of salary or back
wages to the respondent in the impugned judgment of Single Judge
for the period 14.05.2009 to 20.06.2012. Single Judge was of the
CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. v. SIRAJ UDDIN KHAN
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
234
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 9 S.C.R.
opinion that in view of tExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.