Back wages after acquittal may be denied where dismissal followed conviction and the employee's conduct barred service.

Back wages were not automatic after reinstatement where dismissal from service had been based on conviction for a serious offence and the employee was later acquitted. The Court held that the claim had to be assessed independently on the surrounding facts, including the employee's conduct and whether he was wrongly kept out of service. As the employee's own involvement in the crime had prevented him from rendering service during the relevant period, the later acquittal did not, by itself, justify payment of back wages. The employee was therefore held not entitled to back wages.

---

---

Issues: Whether an employee dismissed from service on account of conviction for a serious offence, and later acquitted, was entitled to back wages on reinstatement.

Analysis: The reinstatement already ordered by the High Court was accepted, but the claim for back wages was examined independently. The dismissal had followed the employee's conviction and incarceration, not an unlawful disciplinary action. Back wages are not automatic upon acquittal; they depend on the surrounding facts, including the employee's conduct and whether he was wrongly prevented from working. In the present case, the employee's involvement in the crime had disabled him from rendering service during the relevant period, and the later acquittal did not by itself justify payment of back wages.

Conclusion: The employee was not entitled to back wages.

Ratio Decidendi: Where dismissal from service is founded on conviction and the employee is later acquitted, back wages are not a matter of course and may be denied having regard to the employee's conduct and the circumstances of the cessation of service.

---