Acquitted Public Servant Entitled to Back Wages from Date of Acquittal, Not Date of Termination

The petitioner was terminated from service on March 1, 2016, following his conviction under Sections 323 and 435 of the Indian Penal Code.

On November 28, 2016, the Court quashed the conviction based on a compromise between the petitioner and the complainant (his brother).

Following the quashment, the respondents reinstated the petitioner on May 2, 2018, but denied back wages for the period between termination and reinstatement (01.03.2016 to 02.05.2018) by invoking the principle of "no work no pay".

The petitioner filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seek the aforementioned arrears.

1. Whether the principle of "no work no pay" can be applied to deny back wages to an employee whose termination was based solely on a conviction that was subsequently quashed by a court of law.

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to back wages and consequential benefits from the date of his acquittal/quashment of conviction.

If the basis of a termination (conviction) becomes non-existent due to an acquittal, the employee's right to reinstatement is established.

In Union of India and others v. Jaipal Singh (2004) 1 SCC 121, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that while a department is not at fault for keeping a convicted person out of service, the employee becomes entitled to back wages from the date of acquittal onwards, as the period of service must be counted without a break for all subsequent purposes.

The Court reasoned that the "no work no pay" principle is inapplicable here because the petitioner’s absence was not due to personal misconduct but was a direct result of a termination based on a conviction that was later quashed.

Since the conviction was set aside, the very foundation of the termination order became non-existent.

Following the ratio in Jaipal Singh, the Court observed that while the State shouldn't be penalized for the period the employee was a convict (from termination to acquittal), it cannot deny wages once the legal disability is removed.

The High Court concluded that denying back wages from the date of acquittal/quashment until reinstatement is arbitrary and unsustainable in law.

The Court directed that the petitioner is entitled to back wages and all consequential monetary benefits from the date of his acquittal (November 28, 2016) to the date of his reinstatement (May 2, 2018), and the entire period from termination to reinstatement shall be treated as continuous service.

The petition was disposed of with these directions.