Acceptance of an adverse disciplinary order bars later challenge on merits after the employee acts upon it.

A party who accepts and acts upon an adverse disciplinary order, including by rejoining duty, treats that order as final and cannot later reopen its merits. On that basis, a subsequent civil challenge to the punishment and the consequential denial of back wages was held not maintainable. The Supreme Court held that the lower courts ought not to have re-examined the disciplinary order after such acceptance, and the appeal succeeded with the judgments of the High Court and appellate court set aside and the trial court decree restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent, having accepted the appellate authority's order and joined duty, could subsequently challenge the disciplinary punishment and consequential denial of back wages.

Analysis: The respondent accepted the appellate authority's decision and acted upon it by rejoining service. By such conduct, the respondent treated the order as final and could not later question its validity. In these circumstances, the civil court ought not to have reopened the merits of the disciplinary order.

Conclusion: The subsequent challenge was not maintainable, and the orders of the courts below were liable to be set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the judgment of the High Court and the appellate court were set aside, and the trial court's decree was restored.

Ratio Decidendi: A party who accepts and acts upon an adverse order cannot later challenge it on merits; such conduct bars subsequent litigation on the same order.

---