it2025_00341 — An employee neither placed under suspension nor paid subsistence allowance is entitled for full salary during the period when the court ordered to consider his appeal by the higher authorities keeping the order of the disciplinary authority in abeyance

An employee neither placed under suspension nor paid subsistence allowance is entitled for full salary during the period when the court ordered to consider his appeal by the higher authorities keeping the order of the disciplinary authority in abeyance — The applicant's entitlement to full salary between November 5, 2003, and December 31, 2005, after his termination order was set aside by the Apex Court due to a fresh order passed under Article 81(b)... — Facts : The Applicant is a Postgraduate Teacher (Chemistry) in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) and his services were terminated by Commissioner, KVS, under Article 81

(b) of the Education Code. That order was quashed by a single Judge of the Delhi High Court by order dated 19-9-1994. However, liberty was given to the Respondents herein to proceed against the Applicant afresh as per Rules of the Education Code. The appeal against that order was also dismissed by Division Bench in LPA 116 of 94. Thereafter, the Commissioner of KVS passed an order for the Applicant's reinstatement treating the period of his termination to reinstatement as dies non. As the Applicant was not given consequential benefits, he filed a contempt petition No. 550 of 2000 which was disposed or by the High Court, dated 25-1-2004 directing the Applicant to file a fresh petition in case of non-compliance of the Court's order. The request of the petitioner for consequential benefits was also rejected by order, dated 4-4-2001. As some relief has already been given to him by the Respondents, they were directed to reconsider for grant of such benefits to which he may be found entitled. In the meantime, notice was issued by the department as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against the Applicant under Article 81

(b) of the Education Code on six allegations, three of which related to his misbehaviour with girl students. After giving due opportunity to the Appellant for considering the enquiry report, order, dated 5-11-2003 was passed terminating his service with immediate effect. In view of the above position, he filed O.A. No. 2008 of 2003 challenging his termination order, dated 5-11-2003 passed by Commissioner, KVS. The Tribunal stayed the order of 5-11-2003. That order of CAT was challenged by the Commissioner before the Division Bench of Delhi High Court which was disposed of by the order, dated 16-8-2004 keeping in abeyance the termination order and ordered the Tribunal to dispose of the OA. The petitioner is entitled for 50% of the pay till the Tribunal disposes of the said OA. That OA was disposed of directing the Commissioner to pass a fresh order after considering the Applicant's representation paying 50% of his pay till his representation is disposed of. The Commissioner, KVS by his order, dated 20-1-2006/ 24-1-2006 terminated the Applicant's service with immediate effect under Article 81

(b) of the Education Code, paying three months salary in lieu of the notice period which was upheld by the Vice-chairman, KVS. The Applicant's challenge against that order before the Tribunal was dismissed by Delhi High Court. In view of the above, the Applicant filed an SLP for a direction to the Respondents to pay him full salary for the period between 5-11-2003 and 24-1-2006.