THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 15426 OF 2000 Dated: 02.12.2010 Between: A.G.K.Rao ..... PETITIONER AND The Regional Manager (D.G.M.) and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO WRIT PETITION No. 15426 OF 2000 ORDER : None represented the learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard learned counsel for the respondents. This writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to pay the salaries and allowances with increments and promotions due to the petitioner. As seen from the record, the petitioner worked as Branch Manager in the respondent bank at Shipyard Colony, Branch at Visakhapatnam. The C.B.I Vigilance filed a charge sheet against him under Sections 120-B, 420, 467 read with 120-B and 468 read with 120-B, 471,477-A and 5 (1) D of Prevention of Corruption Act and after the trial, the Special Court for C.B.I cases Visakhapatnam by its common judgment dated 23.11.1994 convicted the petitioner and other accused and sentenced to undergo two years imprisonment with fine of Rs.6,000/- in two cases i.e., C.C.No.10 of 1991 and C.C.No.1 of 1992. The petitioner filed an appeal against his conviction and sentence. This Court allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction and imprisonment imposed on the petitioner. Admittedly the petitioner was dismissed from service on 23.02.1995 pursuant to the conviction by the lower Court and he was under dismissal till 29.03.2000. Thereafter he was reinstated into service pursuant to the judgment of this Court in Appeal Nos.1200 of 1994 and 1201 of 1994. The petitioner is claiming the salary and allowances from 23.02.1995 to 29.03.2000 i.e., during the period of dismissal. Admittedly the petitioner not attended to duty during the above period. On 26.11.2010 none represented for the petitioner and there was no representation. Though the matter is posted for final hearing, today also there is no representation for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that C.B.I has not filed appeal against acquittal. Admittedly the writ petitioner did not attend the duty during the dismissal period. Therefore, he is not entitled for the salary on the principle of ‘no work no pay’. The petitioner is, therefore, not entitled for the salary during the period from 23.02.1995 to 29.03.2000. The Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. _________________ Date: 02.12.2010 V.SURI APPA RAO, J Ivd