Civil Revision No. 4331 of 2008 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 4331 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision : 19.1.2009 State of Punjab and another ..... Petitioners vs Amrik Singh ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. B. B. S. Teji, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. S. K. Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order passed by the learned Executing Court whereby the objections filed by the petitioners were dismissed. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the respondent filed suit for declaration challenging order of his dismissal dated 15.3.1994 being illegal on the ground that he was never served any notice in any inquiry held prior to the passing of the order of dismissal. The suit was decreed by the trial court. While setting aside the order of dismissal and granting continuity of service, it was held as if the order of dismissal had never been passed. The judgment and decree of the courts below was modified by this court in R. S. A. No. 2117 of 2002 vide order dated 12.12.2002 to the effect that the petitioners were given liberty to held fresh inquiry in accordance with law. In the fresh inquiry held vide order dated 1.10.2003, the respondent was held not entitled to salary for the period of 191 days w.e.f. 5.9.1993 to 15.3.1994. In addition to that two years service was forfeited on temporary basis vide order dated 1.10.2003 and absence of 191 days from service was treated as non-duty period and consequently no work no pay. In the execution petition filed by the respondent, the petitioners raised objections regarding not entitlement to salary for the period in the subsequent inquiry held as per observations made by this court in R. S. A. No. 2117 of 2002 for the period of absence. Civil Revision No. 4331 of 2008 (2) Learned counsel for the respondent fairly submitted that in the execution petition filed by him he is not claiming any salary for the period he remained absent i.e. 191 days. His claim is for the salary for the period from 15.3.1994 onwards as has been decreed in his favour while setting aside the order of dismissal. In view of this fair stand of learned counsel for the respondent, the claim made by the petitioners in the present petition does not survive. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. 19.1.2009 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge