Reinstatement requires continuity of service, seniority and notional pay fixation despite a “No Work, No Pay” clause.

The applicant, Sumit, was initially appointed as a Postal Assistant against the 2011–12 vacancy year and had been serving from 11 February 2014.

His candidature/service was subsequently affected on the basis of a negative or inconclusive CFSL report, resulting in his dismissal and earlier litigation before the Tribunal and other courts.

Following legal advice and the Supreme Court’s order dated 24 June 2025 in SLP Diary No. 16083/2025, the Department decided to reinstate similarly placed candidates, subject to possible action after hearing and application of the principle of “No Work No Pay”.

The applicant was accordingly reinstated as Postal Assistant at Rohtak H.O. by order dated 24 July 2025, with “all consequential benefits,” but the order expressly provided that “No Work No Pay” would apply for the period of absence.

Relying on the Tribunal’s decision in Pinkesh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., O.A. No. 1758/2025, order dated 12 March 2026, the applicant challenged the denial of continuity, full pay and arrears, seniority, and other consequential benefits.

Whether the respondents could deny the applicant continuity of service, seniority, pay fixation, and consequential benefits for the period between termination and reinstatement by applying the principle of “No Work No Pay”.

Whether the applicant was entitled to notional continuity of service from the date of initial appointment, with consequential seniority and pay fixation and arrears subject to the limitation directed in Pinkesh.

Whether the respondents’ objections based on availability of departmental remedies affected the maintainability of the Original Application.

The Tribunal applied the principle that where an employee is reinstated pursuant to judicial or departmental reconsideration and the circumstances justify restoration of service continuity, consequential benefits cannot be denied merely by invoking “No Work No Pay,” particularly where the employee’s termination was under challenge and reinstatement was ordered in the context of similarly situated cases.

It relied principally on Pinkesh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., O.A. No. 1758/2025, which directed continuity of service from initial appointment until reinstatement, consequential seniority, and notional pay fixation; required re-fixation of pay; restricted actual arrears of pay and allowances to three years preceding the filing of the respective OAs; and prescribed a three-month compliance period, with GPF-rate interest for delay.

The Tribunal further held that objections concerning revision or review did not bar the OA because the alleged departmental remedies were not shown to be statutory remedies arising from disciplinary proceedings.

The Tribunal found that the applicant’s case was factually and legally analogous to Pinkesh, the only distinction being the relevant recruitment batch, which did not affect the applicant’s entitlement.

The reinstatement order itself referred to consequential benefits, but simultaneously imposed the “No Work No Pay” condition for the period of absence.

Applying the reasoning in Pinkesh, the Tribunal held that this condition unlawfully curtailed the applicant’s service continuity and consequential entitlements for the period from termination to reinstatement.

The respondents’ maintainability objection was rejected because no applicable statutory revision or review remedy had been identified, and the matter arose from the Department’s implementation of the earlier litigation and reinstatement decision rather than from a disciplinary proceeding.

Accordingly, the denial of continuity, seniority, and notional pay fixation was set aside, while actual arrears were governed by the limitation prescribed in Pinkesh.

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

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

The directions were to be implemented within three months from receipt of the certified order, failing which interest at the applicable GPF rate would become payable until actual payment.

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