IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No. 1023 of 2009 Date of Decision : August 25, 2009 Prof. Paramjeet Singh ....Appellant Versus Managing Committee, Guru Nanak Foundation, New Delhi, etc. .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for Mr. Manu K.Bhandari, Advocate T.P.S. MANN, J. Suit filed by the appellant against the respondents was decreed by the trial Court with costs. The plaintiff was held liable to continue on the post of Lecturer Music(vocal) as if no such order dated 26/27.3.1996 terminating his services, was passed against him. However, as he had not attended to his work w.e.f. 15.3.1996 till his again joining the post of Lecturer, he was denied back wages or arrears of pay w.e.f. 15.3.1996. The defendants were directed to allow him to join his duty within two months from the date of passing of the order. The plaintiff challenged the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court regarding denial of back wages w.e.f. 15.3.1996 by filing an appeal. The defendants also filed an appeal for challenging the finding regarding setting aside of the order terminating services of the plaintiff. Both RSA No. 1023 of 2009 -2- the appeals were decided in terms of appointment letter Ex.P5. The plea of the plaintiff regarding grant of full back wages was declined and he was held entitled to back wages for the period from 15.3.1996 to 31.3.1996 only. He is now before this Court in a second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It may also be mentioned here that the appeal filed by the defendants against the judgment and decree of the trial Court was disposed of by the lower appellate Court by setting aside the direction to allow the plaintiff to join his duties within two months from the date of passing of the order by the trial Court. It was held that contract of personal service of the plaintiff came to an end on 31.3.1996. The judgment and decree passed by the lower appellate Court while deciding the appeal of the defendants was challenged by the plaintiff by filing R.S.A. No. 2928 of 2006 which was dismissed in limine on May 20, 2008. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as the order of termination of services of the appellant stands declared as illegal, he was entitled to full back wages from the date of dismissal. It has been held by the learned lower appellate Court that the appointment of the plaintiff vide order Ex.P5 was for a fixed period upto 31.3.1996 and on account of the order dated 26/27.3.1996 (Ex.P9) terminating the services of the plaintiff having been declared as illegal and void, the plaintiff was entitled to back wages only upto 31.3.1996 and not beyond that. No fresh appointment had been granted to the plaintiff though it was so required as per the terms of appointment letter Ex.P5 after end of each and RSA No. 1023 of 2009 -3- every session. As the services of the plaintiff stood terminated from 15.3.1996, he was accordingly, held entitled to the wages for the period w.e.f. 15.3.1996 till 31.3.1996. The findings arrived at by the learned lower appellate Court are not susceptible to attack in a second appeal which is maintainable only on some substantial question of law and not otherwise. The substantial questions of law, as framed by the appellant, do not arise for consideration. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed in limine. ( T.P.S. MANN ) August 25, 2009 JUDGE ajay-1