A.P.S.R.T.C. AND ANR. versus S. NARSAGOUD

A.P.S.R.T.C. AND ANR. versus S. NARSAGOUD

A workman who is reinstated with continuity of service but without backwages, after being found guilty of unauthorised absence, cannot claim benefit of periodical increments for the period of absence unless the court's order specifically directs so; continuity of service for increments requires explicit order.

Parties
Appellant: A.P.S.R.T.C. and Anr.; Respondent: S. Narsagoud
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 January 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of High Court set aside.
Legal Topics
Unauthorised Absence, Increments, Reinstatement, Continuity of Service, Removal From Service, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Employees (pay and Allowances) Regulations, 1964

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A.P.S.R.T.C. and Anr.

Appellant

S. Narsagoud

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether a workman reinstated with continuity of service but without backwages is entitled to periodical increments for the period of unauthorised absence
  2. 2 Whether increments can be notionally earned during the period of unauthorised absence in the absence of a specific direction

Ratio Decidendi

A workman who is reinstated with continuity of service but without backwages, after being found guilty of unauthorised absence, cannot claim benefit of periodical increments for the period of absence unless the court's order specifically directs so; continuity of service for increments requires explicit order.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of High Court set aside.

Orders

  • Judgment of learned single Judge and Division Bench of High Court are set aside.
  • No order as to costs.