Acquittal after criminal custody does not entitle a GDS employee to full TRCA for the put-off-duty period.

The applicant, an Assistant Branch Post Master, was arrested and detained in custody in connection with a criminal case.

Since his detention exceeded 48 hours, he was placed on “deemed put off duty” under Rule 12 of the GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules from 10 August 2018 to 14 June 2019.

He was subsequently acquitted by the criminal court and reinstated in service.

The applicant submitted a representation seeking that the entire period of deemed put off duty be treated as duty for all purposes, including payment of full Time Related Continuity Allowance (TRCA).

In the original application, the Tribunal directed the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation within the prescribed period; the time was later extended by seven days.

The respondents passed an order treating the period as duty for all purposes, but denied full TRCA arrears on the basis of the principle of “no work, no pay”.

The applicant filed the present miscellaneous application under Rule 24 of the CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987, challenging that decision and seeking full TRCA and exemplary costs.

Whether the respondents had complied with the Tribunal’s earlier direction by passing an order on the applicant’s representation within the extended period.

Whether an employee placed on deemed put off duty because of detention in a criminal case, and subsequently acquitted and reinstated, is entitled to full TRCA for the period during which he did not render service.

Whether the Tribunal could examine the correctness of the respondents’ decision in a miscellaneous application filed under Rule 24 of the CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987.

Rule 24 of the CAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987 empowers the Tribunal to issue directions necessary to give effect to its orders, prevent abuse of process, and secure the ends of justice.

Rule 12 of the GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules governs placement on put off duty and provides, in the specified context of departmental proceedings ending in a minor penalty, for payment of full TRCA and allowances for the put-off-duty period.

The Tribunal applied the principle of “no work, no pay,” holding that an employee is generally not entitled to back wages for a period during which services were not rendered, particularly where the circumstances leading to non-employment were not attributable to the department.

It relied on Ranchhodji Chaturji Thakore v. Superintendent Engineer, Gujarat Electricity Board, (1996) 11 SCC 603; Union of India v. Jaipal Singh, (2004) 1 SCC 121; Banshi Dhar v. State of Rajasthan, (2007) 1 SCC 324; and State Bank of India v. Mohammed Abdul Rahim, (2013) 11 SCC 67.

The Tribunal also followed the principle stated by the Orissa High Court in W.P.(C) No. 8692 of 2022 that a GDS employee acquitted after criminal proceedings is not entitled to full back wages/TRCA for the period of put off duty when no service was rendered.

The Tribunal held that the respondents had complied with the earlier order because they considered and disposed of the applicant’s representation within the extended time granted by the Tribunal.

Although Rule 24 permitted the Tribunal to issue consequential directions, the Tribunal nevertheless examined the merits of the respondents’ decision.

It distinguished the applicant’s reliance on the provision concerning full TRCA after departmental proceedings culminate in a minor penalty, observing that the applicant had not been placed on put off duty as a result of departmental proceedings.

Rather, his put off duty resulted statutorily from his detention in a criminal case exceeding 48 hours, and the criminal case was not initiated by the department.

Consequently, the department had neither caused the applicant’s absence nor received his services during the relevant period.

Applying the “no work, no pay” principle and the cited Supreme Court authorities, the Tribunal concluded that acquittal and subsequent reinstatement did not automatically create an entitlement to full TRCA arrears.

Since the applicant did not render service during the period of deemed put off duty and his absence was occasioned by detention in a criminal case not initiated by the department, the principle of “no work, no pay” applied.

The miscellaneous application was dismissed for want of merit, with no order as to costs.