R L GUPTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was posted as Executive Engineer (Electical) in P & T Electrical Division in the year 1970. He was drawing a salary of Rs. 860.00 per month plus A.D.A., C.C.A. and H.R.A. etc. On 29th January, 1970 he was charged with an offence under Section 5(2) read with Sec. 5(l)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act read with Sec. 161 of the Indian Penal Code on a complaint made by one Shri Shiv Kamboja, an Electrical Govt. Contractor. The petitioner was placed under suspension w.e.f. 3rd April, 1970.

(2.) The petitioner was tried- in this: corruption case by the Special Judge, Delhi-and exonerated and acquitted on merits by an order dated 6th September, The respondent did not chose to file an appeal against this judgnet and vide an order dated 29th December.1971 revoked.the order of suspension with immdiate effect The petitioner was paid full salary and alloances for the period after 5th September, 1971 from the date of the judgment acquitting him. however for the period between 3rd April, 1970 till-5th September, 1971 he was paid onlty half of his salary and allowances.

(3.) The Government of India, Department of Communication, P & T Board vide Memo No. 9-5-70-Vig./DISCI dated 29th December, 1971 while passing the order revoking the suspension intimated to the petitioner that after going through the Judgment the President was of the opinion that the suspension of the petitioner was not wholly unjustified and. therefore, the President proposed to restrict the pay and allowances of the petitioner to the amount of subsistence allowance paid to him for the- period of his staspension from 3rd April 1970 till the date of his reinstatement, The petitioner sent a reply to this Memorandum staling therein' that the' communication did not contain any grounds for the proposed action and that the petitioner did not have proper opportunity- to make representation and, therefore, it amounted to denial of opportunity guaranteed under sub-rule (5) of F. R. 54-B and was, therefore, also violative of the principles of natural justice. Thereafter, the respondent vide their communication dated 28th February, 1972 rejected the representation of the petitioner and communicated that the period assuspension till date of his acquittal by the Court on 6th September, 1971 would be treated as period spent on duty for all purposes excepting pay and allowances. The petitioner in this writ petition has challenged these two orders dated- 29th December, 1971 and 28th February, 1972 in not paying Ins half salary and allowances for the period 3rd April, l970 to 5th September, 1971.