IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 10126/2008 Decided on:7.4.2011 _____________________________________________ Dev Raj Sharma. …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. and others. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. Vishwa Bhushan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. R.P. Singh, Asstt. A.G. _____________________________________________________ Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Petitioner had approached the learned Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by way of O.A. No.2772/2000. The same was disposed of by the learned Tribunal on 10.5.2001. Operative portion of the judgment dated 10.5.2001 reads thus: "In view of this position the respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicants for appointment on batchwise basis from the date persons junior to them have been appointed, with all consequential benefits, within a period of one month. The original application is disposed of.” 2. A bare perusal of the judgment dated 10.5.2001 makes it abundantly clear that the petitioner has been held 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2 entitled to all the consequential benefits. However, it is evident from the reply that the respondents have restricted the consequential benefits to the petitioner by giving him benefit of notional pay from the date his juniors were appointed. In fact, consequential benefits have been denied to the petitioner. Rather, the Director of Education had issued the necessary directions to the District Education Officer; vide Annexure PC, to do the needful. Despite this, the grievance of the petitioner has not been redressed. He was entitled to arrears of salary from the date his juniors were appointed. In this case, principle of ‘no work no pay’ will not be attracted, as argued by Mr. R.P. Singh, since he has been prevented from discharging his duties due to inaction of the respondents whereby the persons junior to him were appointed on batchwise basis and the petitioner was left out. 3 Accordingly, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to pay the petitioner salary of O.T. with effect from 22.6.2000 alongwith increments, within a period of two months, after the date of production of certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. No costs. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. 7.4.2011*awasthi*