ARUN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the parties are present.

(2.) This review application has been filed for the following reliefs: -

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, in the writ petition being W.P. (S) No. 4702 of 2013, had challenged the show cause notice dtd. 11/7/2013 and also prayed for quashing the enquiry report of the High Level Enquiry Committee dtd. 23/3/2013 and had prayed for allowing the petitioner to continue on the post of Director, Department of Science and Technology. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner was removed vide order dtd. 23/10/2013 and consequently, the petitioner amended the writ petition and the order of removal was also challenged by filing interlocutory application which was allowed vide order dtd. 31/1/2014. The learned counsel submits that the writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 4702/2013 was ultimately allowed vide order dtd. 6/9/2016, wherein the order of removal dtd. 23/10/2013 (Annexure-30 in the writ petition) was set- aside. The learned counsel submits that while setting-aside the order of removal dtd. 23/10/2013 and consequent notification dtd. 25/10/2013, the respondents were directed to reinstate the petitioner in service on the post of Director, Science and Technology and it was observed that the petitioner shall be entitled to continuity of service from the date of termination/removal till its reinstatement and the intervening period shall be counted towards pensionary benefits except arrears of salary of the said period.