Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2019 (8) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (8) TMI 1727 - SC - Indian LawsSeeking disbursement of retiral benefits to the appellant - entitlement to Back wages - allegation of Misappropriation of funds and defalcation against the appellant/headmaster, during his tenure of service - submission of appellant in support of the appeal is that once the High Court found that the appellant had wrongfully been removed from service, the general principle that back-wages must follow a determination in regard to the illegality of termination should be applied - HELD THAT:- The High Court has held that the action of the Municipal Council in proceeding with a de novo inquiry was vitiated since no reasons were recorded by the Municipal Council. The High Court held that even if a de novo inquiry was permissible under the rules, no reason was furnished for discarding the report of the first inquiry officer and convening a fresh enquiry. Moreover, the appellant had objected to the appointment of Shri Sontakke as an inquiry officer since he was an ex-officer of the Municipal Council who was occupying quarters allotted to him at the material time. Hence, the High Court held that the removal was illegal. However, the High Court denied back-wages for the period between the date of dismissal and the date on which the appellant attained the age of superannuation. The appellant has been granted his retiral dues on the basis of continuity of service. In the present case the first inquiry resulted in a report which came to the conclusion that the charge of misconduct was not substantiated. Upon finding that the convening of a fresh inquiry without recording reasons was contrary to law, the High Court would have ordinarily granted liberty to the Municipal Council to take a fresh decision after due notice to the appellant. Such a course of action was, however, rendered impracticable by supervening events. The writ petition instituted by the appellant before the High Court in 1996 remained pending for nearly eighteen years - High Court was not justified in denying the back-wages to the appellant altogether. Bearing in mind the circumstances which have been noted above, a lumpsum compensation should be directed to be paid. The ends of justice would be met by directing that the appellant be paid an amount quantified at ₹ 5 lakhs in full and final settlement of his claim for backwages for the period between the date of the order of removal and the date on which he attained the age of superannuation - appeal is accordingly disposed of.
|