IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 101 CWP-9568-1999(O&M) Date of Decision : March 24, 2025 CONSTABLE SUKHBIR SINGH .....Petitioner VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL Present : Dr. Suresh Kumar Redhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Raman Sharma, Addl. AG, Haryana. JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner through the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to the respondents to pay him salary for the period from October’ 1992 to October’ 1996. 2. The petitioner joined Haryana Police as a Constable in 1989. On 7.8.1992, he proceeded on casual leave. He fell ill and was admitted in Safdarjang Hospital, New Delhi. The respondent on account of his absence from duty discharged him. He unsuccessfully preferred an appeal as well as revision before higher authorities. His writ petition filed before this Court came to be dismissed. He preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court by way of SLP(C) No. 25710 of 1995 which came to be allowed vide order dated 2.5.1996. The order dated 2.5.1996 is reproduced as under:- AJAY KUMAR 2025.03.25 09:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP-9568-1999(O&M) -2- “Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the appellant well as counsel for the respondent-State of Haryana and others. The charge which was framed against the appellant who was then a constable that he remained absent without leave. His service wеre remained terminated. A stand was taken on behalf of the appellant that he was ill during the period of absence and had to be hospitalised at Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi. Our attention was drawn to some of the certificates granted by the consulting physicians of Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi. According to us, the only proper course shall be direct the appellant to file a representation before the competent authority enclosing all the relevant papers and documents including the medical certificates which shall be considered in accordance with law. If the competent authority is satisfied about the defence taken on behalf of the appellant. It will be open to the said competent authority to pass any appropriate order in accordance with law. The appeal is disposed of accordingly, No costs.” 3. The respondent in compliance of the aforesaid order reinstated him vide order dated 25.10.1996. The relevant extracts of the order dated 25.10.l996 are reproduced as under:- “The above certificates were verified by Dr. R. Srivastave on 16.9.96 and the absence of Ex. const. Sukhbir Singh was duly covered by these certificate as he remained under the treatment in Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi. However he was negligent and undisciplined in the instant case and did not inform the authorities about his illness in time which is not expected from him being the member of disciplined force. Keeping in view the above facts a lenient view is taken and Ex. Const. Sukhbir Singh is taken back in service with immediate effect. However no salary or other amoluments will be given to him from the date of discharge till he rejoins the service on the principle of "No work no pay" basis. Order be booked accordingly. He is allotted regimental no. 5/359 of this battalion.” AJAY KUMAR 2025.03.25 09:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP-9568-1999(O&M) -3- 4. The petitioner was not paid salary for the period from October 1992 to October 1996 on the principle of ‘No work no pay’. 5. Mr. Redhu submits that there was no fault on the part of the petitioner, thus, he was entitled to salary for the aforesaid period. 6. Learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the claim of the petitioner needs to be considered in the light of judgment dated 5.6.2024 passed by this Court in CWP-7776-2024 titled “Iqbal Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others”. 7. It is apt to notice that the period in dispute is October’ 1992 to October’ 1996 and during the said period, Punjab Civil Services Rules were applicable to the State of Haryana. 8. In the wake of statement of both sides, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to jurisdictional authority to consider the claim of the petitioner in the light of judgment dated 5.6.2024 passed by this Court in Iqbal Singh’s case (supra). 9. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not be entitled to interest on arrears, if any, determined by the jurisdictional authority. 10. Pending misc. application, if any, shall also stand disposed of. (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) March 24, 2025 JUDGE ajay-1 Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No AJAY KUMAR 2025.03.25 09:15 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh