AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rajendra Menon, Judge
Petitioner was suspended from service. Thereafter, the suspension was revoked. However, by the impugned order dated 5.9.2006 period of suspension is treated as "no work no wages" and apart from the payment of subsistence allowance, nothing is paid to the petitioner.
From the return it is seen that after issuing show cause notice, impugned action is taken. However, into the show cause notice issued to the petitioner neither any enquiry is conducted nor any punishment is imposed.
Once no enquiry is conducted and no departmental action is taken, suspension period has to be regularized treating the period to be spent on duty. Period can be treated as "no work no wages'' only if a misconduct is proved and employee is punished and in this case simply by suspending the petitioner, the show cause notice is issued and thereafter suspension is revoked and no further action is taken. Such a procedure could not be followed. As impugned order is passed contrary to the principles of law and as no enquiry is conducted, and as the procedure followed for confirming the period of suspension on the principle of "no work no wages" is contrary to requirement of Fundamental Rules 54, this petition is allowed.
Impugned order dated 5.9.2006 is quashed and respondents are directed to ensure that entire salary due to the petitioner in accordance to rule shall be paid within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid this petition stands allowed and disposed of.
c.c. as per rules.