om:71-cl-2023-May — A GDS removed from service on the basis of conviction by a criminal court, though could be reinstated, back-wages (TRCA) for the period he was kept out of service is not admissible to him. Only from the date, he informs the authorities of the acquittal till he is reinstated, he is entitled to the back-wages

GDS Rules

A GDS removed from service on the basis of conviction by a criminal court, though could be reinstated, back-wages (TRCA) for the period he was kept out of service is not admissible to him. Only from the date, he informs the authorities of the acquittal till he is reinstated, he is entitled to the back-wages — The chunk pertains to an Original Application (OA No. 260/00509 of 2021) regarding a GDS who was convicted in a criminal case, removed from service, but could be reinstated. The Applicant claims back... — Facts: The Applicant while working as ED BPM, Damodarpur B.O. in account with Dungura S.O. was convicted in a criminal charge under Section 409 IPC of S.P.E. Case No. 10 of 1990. The said judgment was also upheld in appeal. following his conviction, the authority concerned in exercise of the power conferred under Rule 7 of EDA (Conduct and Service) Rules, 1964 removed him from service. The Applicant had filed criminal revision petition No. 570 of 99 before the Hon'ble High Court of Odisha against his conviction and the Hon'ble High Court of Odisha set aside the conviction of the petitioner and the sentence passed thereunder. Thereafter, the Applicant submitted representation, on 8-2-2017 praying for his reinstatement. It was at the intervention of the Tribunal that on 16-8-2017 that the Applicant was reinstated. Accordingly, Applicant joined the post and submitted representation, claiming consequential service and financial benefits from the date of termination, i.e. 24-2-1998, till his re-engagement. Claim for TRCA was rejected basically on the ground that GDS Rule does not permit for payment of TRCA during the period when he did not discharge duty in the post. Being aggrieved, the Applicant filed the instant O.A.
Respondents contested the matter by stating that in terms of the GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, he having not discharged his duties is not entitled to any TRCA. The Respondents have placed reliance in the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Raj Narain v. Union of India reported in [ 2019 5 SCC 809 ]. Accordingly, the Respondents have prayed for dismissal of the OA. The Applicant filed rejoinder asserting that he was honourably acquitted in the criminal case and remained away from duty not on his own volition, and thus on his reinstatement he is entitled to all consequential service and financial benefits.
The Tribunal, restricted arrears of TRCA only from the date the Applicant informed the Respondent of his acquittal till his reinstatement by applying the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Raj Narain (supra). Thereafter, the Applicant filed RA 2/2022 for review of the aforesaid order on the ground that although the Tribunal noted the acquittal of the Applicant in criminal case and the grievance of the Applicant for financial and consequential benefits but there was no finding in the order whether the pay of the Applicant needs to be fixed in reference to his date of termination. The RA was dismissed vide Order, dated 7-11-2022. The Applicant approached the Hon'ble High Court which remanded the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration. And, in compliance of the order of the Hon'ble High Court, this matter has been heard afresh. The Tribunal took into account various judgments on the subject
(i) Union of India v. Jaipal Singh [ (2004) SCC 121 ],
(ii) Baldev Singh v. Union of India and others [ (2005) 8 SCC 747 ],
(iii) State Bank of India and another v. Mohammed Abdul Rahim [ (2013) 11 SCC 67 ]. In all these cases, back wages were not allowed for the period the person was kept out of service, save to the extent that where delay in reinstatement is attributable to the Respondents.

GDS Rules

A GDS removed from service on the basis of conviction by a criminal court, though could be reinstated, back-wages (TRCA) for the period he was kept out of service is not admissible to him. Only from the date, he informs the authorities of the acquittal till he is reinstated, he is entitled to the back-wages — The chunk pertains to an Original Application (OA No. 260/00509 of 2021) regarding a GDS who was convicted in a criminal case, removed from service, but could be reinstated. The Applicant claims back... — Facts: The Applicant while working as ED BPM, Damodarpur B.O. in account with Dungura S.O. was convicted in a criminal charge under Section 409 IPC of S.P.E. Case No. 10 of 1990. The said judgment was also upheld in appeal. following his conviction, the authority concerned in exercise of the power conferred under Rule 7 of EDA (Conduct and Service) Rules, 1964 removed him from service. The Applicant had filed criminal revision petition No. 570 of 99 before the Hon'ble High Court of Odisha against his conviction and the Hon'ble High Court of Odisha set aside the conviction of the petitioner and the sentence passed thereunder. Thereafter, the Applicant submitted representation, on 8-2-2017 praying for his reinstatement. It was at the intervention of the Tribunal that on 16-8-2017 that the Applicant was reinstated. Accordingly, Applicant joined the post and submitted representation, claiming consequential service and financial benefits from the date of termination, i.e. 24-2-1998, till his re-engagement. Claim for TRCA was rejected basically on the ground that GDS Rule does not permit for payment of TRCA during the period when he did not discharge duty in the post. Being aggrieved, the Applicant filed the instant O.A.
Respondents contested the matter by stating that in terms of the GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, he having not discharged his duties is not entitled to any TRCA. The Respondents have placed reliance in the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Raj Narain v. Union of India reported in [ 2019 5 SCC 809 ]. Accordingly, the Respondents have prayed for dismissal of the OA. The Applicant filed rejoinder asserting that he was honourably acquitted in the criminal case and remained away from duty not on his own volition, and thus on his reinstatement he is entitled to all consequential service and financial benefits.
The Tribunal, restricted arrears of TRCA only from the date the Applicant informed the Respondent of his acquittal till his reinstatement by applying the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Raj Narain (supra). Thereafter, the Applicant filed RA 2/2022 for review of the aforesaid order on the ground that although the Tribunal noted the acquittal of the Applicant in criminal case and the grievance of the Applicant for financial and consequential benefits but there was no finding in the order whether the pay of the Applicant needs to be fixed in reference to his date of termination. The RA was dismissed vide Order, dated 7-11-2022. The Applicant approached the Hon'ble High Court which remanded the matter to the Tribunal for reconsideration. And, in compliance of the order of the Hon'ble High Court, this matter has been heard afresh. The Tribunal took into account various judgments on the subject
(i) Union of India v. Jaipal Singh [ (2004) SCC 121 ],
(ii) Baldev Singh v. Union of India and others [ (2005) 8 SCC 747 ],
(iii) State Bank of India and another v. Mohammed Abdul Rahim [ (2013) 11 SCC 67 ]. In all these cases, back wages were not allowed for the period the person was kept out of service, save to the extent that where delay in reinstatement is attributable to the Respondents.

Original Rule Text

Original Rule Text