IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2009 / 18TH ASHADHA 1931 WA.No. 1466 of 2009() AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.115/2008 Dated 28/05/2009 APPELLANTS: RESPONDENTS 1. THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA YOGAKSHEMA, JEEVAN BHIMA MARG,MUMBAI REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA YOGAKSHEMA, JEEVAN BHIMA MARG,MUMBAI. 3. THE SECRETARY (PERSONNEL/ADMINISTRATION LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, CENTRAL OFFICE YOGAKSHEMA, JEEVAN BHIMA MARG, MUMBAI. BY ADV.SRI.S.EASWARAN RESPONDENT: PETITIONER P.K.JOHN, SENIOR BRANCH MANAGER (RETD) LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.29/1142 JUSTICE LANE, JANATHA ROAD, VYTTILA, KOCHI-19. BY ADV. SRI. GEORGE JACOB (JOSE) THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 1466 OF 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The respondents in the Writ Petition are the appellants. The Writ Petition was filed challenging Ext.P10 order of the second respondent, Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation of India, to the extent it declined arrears of salary to the writ petitioner in the post of Senior Branch Manager from 23.5.1992 to 24.12.1994. 2. The writ petitioner was convicted in a criminal case by the competent court on 13.11.1990. He was suspended from service pursuant to his conviction on 19.12.1992 and thereafter he was dismissed from service on 12.11.1993. Later, he was honourably acquitted on 22.11.1993. Pursuant to the acquittal, he was reinstated in service on 4.4.1994 as Assistant Branch Manager. Later, by the impugned order, Ext.P10, the writ petitioner was promoted as Senior Branch Manager W.A. NO. 1466/2009 2 notionally and he was given consequential benefits in the scale of pay applicable to Senior Branch Manager with effect from 24.12.1994. The dispute raised in the Writ Petition was concerning the arrears of salary during the period from 23.5.1992 to 23.12.1994. The writ petitioner claimed the entire arrears of salary for the said period in the post of Senior Branch Manager. The learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition holding that the writ petitioner was entitled to get salary in the scale of pay of Senior Branch Manager for the entire period, except for the spell from 12.11.1993 to 22.11.1993 when he was out of service owing to dismissal. Feeling aggrieved by the said direction, the respondents in the Writ Petition have preferred this appeal. 3. The learned counsel for the appellants, Sri. S. Easwaran, submitted that since the respondent/writ petitioner had not worked in the post of Senior Branch Manager for the period in question, he is not entitled to get arrears of salary in the scale of pay of that post. In fact, he was reinstated on 4.4.1994 in the post of Assistant Branch Manager. Learned counsel also submitted that the principle of 'no work, no pay' will apply and, therefore, for the period he was out of service, the writ petitioner could not have been paid any salary, either in the post of Senior Branch Manager or Assistant Branch Manager. W.A. NO. 1466/2009 3 4. We heard the learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner. He brought to our notice Regulation 38 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India Staff Regulations, 1960. In view of the said Regulation, the respondent is entitled to get salary for the entire period he was out of service, as he was honourably acquitted, it is submitted. The learned Single Judge declined backwages only for a period of ten days. Regulation 38 reads as follows: “Treatment of the Period of Suspension: 38. When the suspension of an employee is held to be unjustified or not wholly justified; or when an employee who has been dismissed, removed or suspended is reinstated, the disciplinary, appellant, or reviewing authority, as the case may be whose decision shall be final, may grant to him for the period of his absence from duty - (a) if he is honourably acquitted, the full pay and allowances which he would have been entitled to if he had not been dismissed, removed or suspended, less the subsistence allowance.” 5. It is the common ground that the writ petitioner was acquitted honourably. Therefore, we are of the view that his case is covered by clause (a) of Regulation 38. So, he is entitled to get salary for the entire W.A. NO. 1466/2009 4 period during which he was out of service. Since he was notionally promoted as Senior Manager with retrospective effect from 23.5.1992, we have no doubt that arrears of salary should be computed in the scale of pay applicable to the said post. The general principle' no work, no pay' applies only where the rules are silent on the aspect. The decisions of the various courts relating to the principle 'no work, no pay, cannot apply to the facts of this case, in view of the express provisions contained in Regulation 38 (a). Therefore, we find no merit in the appeal. The Writ Appeal is accordingly dismissed. Since the respondent/writ petitioner has not filed any appeal, he shall he paid the arrears of salary, as directed in the judgment under appeal by the learned Single Judge. The arrears of salary shall be paid within one month from today. (K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ W.A. NO. 1466/2009 5 K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. W.A. NO.1466/2009 JUDGMENT 9th July, 2009 W.A. NO. 1466/2009 6