https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289708 In an ordinary master-and-servant relationship without express service rules, suspension did not stop the employer's duty to pay remuneration, so the employee was entitled to salary and dearness allowance at the rate then being drawn when suspension began. The dismissal was upheld because the misconduct was proved, the charges were communicated, and an opportunity to respond was given; the absence of a further personal hearing did not vitiate the decision. The employee was also entitled to the balance of sanctioned arrears of pay, but no mandatory injunction could compel revival of the lapsed policy when his own premium obligations remained unpaid. en-us Fri, 09 Sep 1960 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Aug 2020 15:27:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289708 In an ordinary master-and-servant relationship without express service rules, suspension did not stop the employer's duty to pay remuneration, so the employee was entitled to salary and dearness allowance at the rate then being drawn when suspension began. The dismissal was upheld because the misconduct was proved, the charges were communicated, and an opportunity to respond was given; the absence of a further personal hearing did not vitiate the decision. The employee was also entitled to the balance of sanctioned arrears of pay, but no mandatory injunction could compel revival of the lapsed policy when his own premium obligations remained unpaid. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 09 Sep 1960 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289708