Prakash Kumar Dixit vs. Ajay Kumar Bhalla and Ors.

This case involved Prakash Kumar Dixit, who joined the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) in 1986. After a dispute over unauthorized leave, he was removed from service in 1995. Following two decades of intense litigation, the High Court set aside his removal. The department decided to impose only a minor punishment (salary reduction for three years) instead. However, due to administrative errors and misinterpretations by government secretaries, he was terminated again in 2018, which was also struck down. When the department finally considered him for promotion to Deputy Commandant in 2023, they made it 'notional' (paper-only without back wages) from 2021, claiming his three-year punishment period started in 2018. The Supreme Court rejected this, clarifying that a minor punishment must relate back to his original 1995 termination date and ended in 1998. It ruled that his promotion must be effective from the date his juniors were promoted, with full back wages paid from November 2012. Criticizing the department's callous attitude, which forced a promising officer into 25 years of litigation, the Supreme Court ordered the government to pay him ₹10 lakhs in litigation costs and finalize his pay and pension increments within six months.

Prakash Kumar Dixit joined the CRPF in 1986 but was removed in 1995 due to unauthorized leave. Over 25 years of litigation, courts repeatedly ordered the department to reconsider, leading to a minor penalty instead of removal, which officials repeatedly bungled.

The Supreme Court ordered the government to promote Dixit to Deputy Commandant with actual back wages from November 2012. It also ordered the government to pay him Rs. 10 lakhs as compensation for the long delay and calculate his revised pension within six months.

This judgment protects employees from being denied their rightful promotions due to bureaucratic delays or the dragging of minor punishments. It warns government departments that forcing employees into decades of unnecessary litigation will result in heavy financial penalties.