933 of 1995, when a Division Bench of the High Court on 29.7.2004 accepted, that the resolution passed by the Gram Panchayat dated 30.6.1986, for dispensing with the service of the respondent, was number in companysonance with law.
By the order passed by the High Court, the respondent was deemed to be treated as having companytinuously rendered service against the post of Octroi Clerk, with effect from the date his services were dispensed with.
He was also held entitled to full back wages, besides other companysequential benefits, for the intervening period.
The review petition filed by the appellant came to be dismissed by the High Court, vide an order dated 14.09.2004.
If the amount had even been doubled by the time his services were dispensed with, he would be earning approximately Rs.5,000/ per annum, on 30.06.1986.
The operation of the above order passed by the High Court, was stayed by this Court on 24.10.2005.
Even though, the challenge raised by the respondent has a chequered history, it is relevant to mention, that the respondent succeeded in Letters Patent Appeal No.
The respondent was, therefore, ordered to be reinstated, against the post of an Octroi Clerk.
The aforesaid interim order has companytinued till date.
BY the above yardsticks, the respondent would be entitled to, only a sum of Rs.2,500/ per annum.
The above amount shall be released to the respondent within three months, from the date a certified companyy of this order, is furnished to the Gram Panchayat.
Thereafter, the service of the respondent was dispensed with with effect from 30.6.1986.
The High Court accordingly set aside the above resolution.
The appeal stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
The respondent originally declined to do so.
J. JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR NEW DELHI J. JULY 23, 2015.
