COURT NO.2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) 1518/2004 Jai Narain Walia …….Petitioner Versus Chairman, Zila Panchayat, Dehradun And Others …….Respondents Sri Shobhit Saharia, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Sri Narayana Dutt, learned Counsel for the respondent no. 1 & 2. Sri H.M. Raturi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no. 3. 27th June, 2008 Hon’ble P.C. Verma, J. Controversy involved in the present writ petition is regarding payment of salary for the period between the date of termination till the date of reinstatement. 2. Petitioner was initially appointed as Driver on 31.10.1973 in the office of Zila Panchayat at Dehradun. Vide order dated 21.4.1997, the services of the petitioner were terminated w.e.f. 19.4.1997 by the respondent no. 2/Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Dehradun on the ground of indiscipline, insubordination and one day’s absence from duty i.e. on 19.4.1994 without any leave. Aggrieved by the order dated 19.4.1997 which was communicated to him vide order dated 21.4.1997, the petitioner preferred a writ petition before this Court, which was finally disposed of vide order dated 7.3.2003. While disposing of the aforesaid writ petition of the 2 petitioner, Division Bench of this Court made the following direction/observation: “In view of above, without entering into the merit of the case and considering the above factor that the petitioner was permitted to cross the efficiency bar in March, 1997 and he had been punished for one day’s absence, we set aside impugned order dated 19.04.1997 communicated under the signature of respondent no. 2 dated 21.04.1997 dismissing/terminating petitioner’s service, the respondents are directed to reconsider the matter afresh so that an order of punishment proportionate to the indiscipline on the part of the petitioner may be passed in the matter. The decision may be taken within a period of two months. With this the petition is finally disposed of.” 3. Thereafter in compliance of the aforesaid judgment and order dated 7.3.2003, the petitioner was reinstated in service vide order dated 1.5.2003 stating therein that petitioner shall not be paid the salary for the period from the date of his dismissal i.e. 19.4.1997 till the date of his reporting on duty after the reinstatement. 4. I have considered the whole matter including the order dated 7.3.2003 passed by the Division Bench of this Court and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of both the parties, it is provided that the petitioner shall be paid the salary according to relevant leave rules. The rest of the period 3 shall be treated as the period spent on extraordinary leave without pay and accordingly, petitioner shall be entitled to pensionary and other consequential benefits. In this manner, the continuity of service of the petitioner is also maintained. However, petitioner shall be paid the arrears of salary with effect from 7.3.2003. 5. With the aforesaid direction, writ petition is disposed of finally. The arrears to be calculated in the manner indicated above shall be worked out and paid within two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order, failing which it shall entail an interest at the rate of 12 per cent. There shall be no order as to costs. (P.C. Verma, J.) 27.6.2008 Prabodh