Constable Uma Shankaran v. Union of India - Backwages - Illegal Dismissal
Ordering Backwages To Illegally Dismissed Employee Not Automatic Relief; But Employer Cannot Escape From Suffering Consequences Of His Illegal Action: SC
Labour Law - Backwages - Ordering back wages to be paid to a dismissed employee – upon his dismissal being set aside by a court of law – is not an automatic relief and, ordinarily, is dependent on the employee being not employed in the interregnum. However, the general rule is that if the employer by reason of its illegal act deprives any of its employees from discharging his work and the termination is ultimately held to be bad in law, such employee has a legitimate and valid claim to be restored with all that he would have received but for being illegally kept away from work. This is based on the principle that although the employee was willing to perform work, it was the employer who did not accept work from him and, therefore, if the employer’s action is held to be illegal and bad, such employer cannot escape from suffering the consequences. (Para 8)
Case Info
Basic Case Details
Case name: Constable Uma Shankaran v. Union of India & Ors.
Neutral citation: Not mentioned in the extract. (Only cause title, appeal number and dates are given.)
Court and coram: Supreme Court of India, Civil Appellate JurisdictionCoram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manmohan
Judgment date: 19 January 2026
Precedents (caselaws) and citations referred
- Maharashtra SRTC v. Mahadeo Krishna Naik, (2025) 4 SCC 321– Cited as authority for the principle that back wages are not automatic but generally follow when an employee is illegally kept out of service and there is no plea or proof of gainful employment.
- The Delhi High Court judgment (quoted by the Supreme Court) refers to:
- Ram Pal v. Union of India
- Ex. Head Constable Moti Singh v. Union of India, W.P. (C) No.3847/2006, decision dated 15 March 2017
- Nirmal Lakra v. Union of India
- Ex. Constable Raj Kumar v. Union of India
(These are used to show that in similar SSFC dismissal cases, reinstatement with consequential benefits was granted.)
Statutes / laws referred
The extract does not name specific statutory provisions. The discussion is on general service law principles governing:
- Illegality of dismissal/removal from service.
- Grant or denial of back wages/arrears of pay after removal is set aside.
- The concept of “gainful employment” in the interregnum as a factor for deciding back wages.
No particular sections of a statute (e.g. CRPF Act, CCS rules, etc.) are quoted in this part of the order.