An employee dismissed after acquittal is entitled to back wages until reinstatement.

The appellant, a police constable, was convicted under Section 409 IPC on 15 May 2017 and sentenced to five years’ rigorous imprisonment.

He was acquitted by the appellate court on 28 June 2017.

Despite the acquittal, he was dismissed from service on 8 August 2017 and reinstated on 16 February 2018.

The Single Judge quashed the dismissal but denied monetary benefits; the appellant appealed that denial.

Whether the appellant was entitled to back wages for the period between his dismissal on 8 August 2017 and reinstatement on 16 February 2018, given that his acquittal preceded his dismissal.

Whether the appellant’s acquittal retrospectively erased the legal consequences of his conviction for the period before acquittal.

In Ranchhodji Chaturji Thakore v. Superintendent Engineer, Gujarat Electricity Board, Himmatnagar, (1996) 11 SCC 603, reinstatement following acquittal does not automatically entitle an employee to back wages for a period when conviction or incarceration prevented service; entitlement depends on the circumstances, including whether the employer unlawfully prevented the employee from working.

This principle was followed in Union of India v. Jaipal Singh, (2004) 1 SCC 121.

Management of Reserve Bank of India, New Delhi v. Bhopal Singh Panchal, AIR 1994 SC 552, applied the principle that pay for an absence period depends on the applicable service rules and the competent authority’s treatment of that period.

State Bank of India v. Mohammed Abdul Rahim, (2013) 11 SCC 67, held that subsequent acquittal does not retrospectively erase the legal consequences of a conviction for the period in which those consequences operated.

In Raj Narain v. Union of India, (2019) 5 SCC 809, the employee was held entitled to back wages from acquittal until reinstatement.

Applying these authorities, the Court held that where dismissal occurs after acquittal, back wages are payable from the date of dismissal until reinstatement.

The Court distinguished the period of conviction from the period following acquittal.

The appellant’s conviction was set aside on 28 June 2017, but his dismissal occurred later, on 8 August 2017.

Thus, unlike cases in which an employee’s conviction or incarceration prevented service, the appellant was dismissed after acquittal.

Applying the principle in Raj Narain, the Court concluded that he was entitled to back wages for the period from dismissal until reinstatement.

The Court partly set aside the Single Judge’s order insofar as it denied back wages and directed that the appellant receive back wages from 8 August 2017, the date of dismissal, until 16 February 2018, the date of reinstatement.

Any pending application was also disposed of.