P RAMASWAMY Vs. GENERAL MANAGER CANARA BANK BANGALORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHORT question which calls for determination in this appeal is whether the employee on reinstatement after his acquittal is entitled to the difference in amount of full wages and the subsistence allowance paid between the date of order of suspension till date of withdrawal of suspension.

(2.) THE facts of the case are : For the offence allegedly committed under Indian Penal Code, a charge-sheet had been filed by the police against the petitioner-appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'appellant' ). On coming to know of the filing of the criminal case against the appellant, the respondent-Bank placed the appellant under suspension. During the period of suspension the appellant was paid subsistence allowance by the respondent-Bank. The criminal case pending against the appellant was compounded and the appellant was acquitted. Once the criminal proceedings ended in acquittal, the respondent-Bank revoked the order of suspension made against the appellant and reinstated him in service. Appellant was not paid the difference of amount of full back wages and the subsistence allowance during the period of suspension. No further action was taken against him. The same was withheld by the respondent-Bank, which impelled the appellant to file the writ petition in this Court.

(3.) CASE of the appellant is that the Bank had kept him under suspension wrongly and on reinstatement the appellant was entitled to full wages. As against this, the case of the respondent-Bank is that the Bank kept the appellant under suspension for certain allegations against him. The suspension order came to be passed only because of the pendency of criminal case against the appellant. Appellant did not work during the suspension period and it was not fault of the Bank that work could not be taken from the employee and therefore the employee was not entitled to relief sought in this writ petition.