Reinstated employees are entitled to continuity, seniority and notional pay fixation, with arrears limited to three years.

The applicant, Atul Kumar B. Solanki, was initially appointed on 11 February 2014 and was serving as a Sorting Assistant at SRO Bhuj, RMS “RJ” Division.

His candidature had earlier been terminated in connection with a negative or inconclusive CFSL report.

Following a policy decision of the Department of Posts, issued after consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs, candidates whose candidature had been terminated on that basis were permitted to be reinstated, subject to certain conditions, including adherence to the principle of “No Work No Pay”.

The applicant was consequently reinstated with immediate effect by order dated 17 April 2025, but the reinstatement order denied back wages and stipulated that “No Work No Pay” would strictly apply.

Relying on the Tribunal’s decision in Pinkesh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., O.A. No. 1758/2025, decided on 12 March 2026, the applicant sought quashing of the conditions denying consequential benefits, grant of continuity of service, seniority, pay fixation and back wages.

The respondents opposed the application, principally relying on maintainability objections and the “No Work No Pay” principle.

Whether the condition imposing “No Work No Pay” upon the applicant’s reinstatement could validly deny him continuity of service, seniority, notional pay fixation and consequential monetary benefits for the period between termination and reinstatement

Whether the respondents’ objections concerning availability of departmental remedies and maintainability justified rejection of the Original Application

Whether the applicant was entitled to the same relief granted in Pinkesh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

The Tribunal applied the principle that where an employee is reinstated pursuant to a decision recognising the invalidity or unsustainability of the termination, the authority must consider continuity of service and consequential benefits rather than mechanically applying “No Work No Pay.”

It relied principally on the precedent in Pinkesh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., which directed continuity of service from initial appointment until reinstatement, consequential seniority and notional pay fixation, re-fixation of pay, and payment of arrears limited to three years preceding the filing of the respective Original Applications.

The Tribunal also held that non-statutory departmental remedies such as revision or review could not defeat maintainability where the impugned order arose from the earlier litigation and administrative decision-making process.

Interest at the applicable GPF rate was directed in case of non-compliance within the prescribed period.

The Tribunal found that the applicant’s case was factually indistinguishable from the principle applied in Pinkesh, the only distinction identified by the respondents being the relevant recruitment batch.

Since the applicant had been reinstated under the Department’s considered decision concerning candidates affected by the CFSL-related termination, the reinstatement could not be coupled with an absolute denial of service continuity and consequential benefits merely by invoking “No Work No Pay”.

The Tribunal further rejected the maintainability objection, observing that the suggested revision and review remedies were not shown to be statutory and that the dispute did not arise from disciplinary proceedings attracting such remedies.

Applying the directions in Pinkesh, it held that continuity, seniority and pay fixation were warranted on a notional basis, while arrears were to be restricted to the three-year period preceding the filing of the Original Application.

The impugned reinstatement order was set aside to the extent that it denied the applicant consequential benefits for the period from termination to reinstatement.

The respondents were directed to grant the applicant continuity of service from the date of initial appointment until reinstatement, with consequential seniority and notional pay fixation; re-fix his pay accordingly; and pay arrears of pay and allowances limited to three years preceding the filing of the Original Application.

Compliance was directed within three months of receipt of the certified copy of the order, failing which interest at the applicable GPF rate would become payable.

Pending miscellaneous applications were disposed of, with no order as to costs.