- (1.) The respondent was initially appointed a casual Helper in 1979. Later, by an order dated 12/1/1983 (Annexure "b") , he was selected for appointment to the post of Helper in the pay scale of Rs. 200-280 with usual da and ADA etc. sanctioned by the government from time to time. The appointment was on probation for a period of three months from the date of joining. After this appointment had taken effect and the respondent was working on the post of Helper, his service was terminated, w. e. f. , 1/1/1984 by an order dated 31/12/1983 (Annexure "c") which did not specify any reason therein. The respondent challenged the termination of his service before the State Administrative tribunal. By the impugned judgment dated 14/2/1992, the tribunal has quashed the termination order and directed reinstatement of the respondent on the post of Helper with full back wages and continuity of service. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
(2.) Learned counsel for the respondent on instructions stated that the respondent is prepared to forego the entire back wages provided the relief of reinstatement is not disturbed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that there is no error in the view taken by the tribunal relating to the order of termination which cannot be sustained. This being so, we are of the view that the relief of reinstatement in service without payment of any back wages but with continuity of service for other benefits is the appropriate relief to grant in the present case.
(3.) Accordingly, we uphold the tribunal's order insofar as it grants the relief of reinstatement with continuity of service but set aside the tribunal'sdirection for payment of back wages to the respondent. We also direct that the reinstatement of the respondent be effected by taking all the necessary steps for that purpose promptly so that the respondent is taken back on duty on or before 17/2/1997.;