In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Civil Revision No. 2896 of 2003 Date of decision: May 26, 2009 The Chief Executive Officer, Narnaul .. Petitioner Vs. Surjeet Singh and others .. Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal Present: Mr. V.D. Sharma, Advocate for Mr. R.S. Tacoria, Advocate for the petitioner. A.N. Jindal, J From the decree passed by the Senior Sub Judge, Narnaul, dated 5.1.2005, it is apparent that order of termination was quashed being against the principle of natural justice and equity, without jurisdiction, null and void, ultravires and ineffective qua the rights of the plaintiff- respondent decree holder (herein referred as 'the decree holder') and the plaintiff was entitled to continue in service as if no such impugned orders had been passed, issued or existed together with all the benefits of service admissible and accrued to him from time to time, and to accrue in future including arrears of his pay and salary. The court further ordered that the decree holder was further entitled to any other relief to which the court deemed appropriate. Now such superfluous objections as raised by the judgment debtor that the plaintiff was not entitled to any consequential benefits on account of cancellation of the termination order being superfluous could not be raised. It is surprising that the judgment debtors-petitioner (herein referred as 'the judgment debtor') are dragging the decree holder by filing Civil Revision No. 2896 of 2003 -2- *** one litigation after the other for which they must be penalised. Certainly, as per the modification made by the lower appellate court, the decree holder will neither be entitled to any salary for the period which he remained absent i.e. absent as per records of the department. As such, this petition stands dismissed with special costs of Rs.20,000/-. May 26, 2009 (A.N. Jindal) deepak Judge