BISHAN CHAND GUPTA Vs. CHAIRMAN CANARA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V. C. Misra, J.- This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking relief for disbursement of the difference of the full salary payable to him alongwith other emoluments after deducting the subsistence allowance actually paid to him during the suspension period from 26-3-1992 to 14-1-1994 on the ground that the petitioner was acquitted of the criminal charges framed against him on the first information report lodged under Sections 8 and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 wherein he was implicated as an accused person in terms of the provisions of Rule-12 Chapter XI of the Canara Bank Service Code, which were later on withdrawn by the State Government, and thereafter the respondents allowed him to continue with his service and revoked the suspension order. However, they did not pay the balance amount of the full salary.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that declining the disbursement of the difference of the full salary payable to the petitioner for the period of his suspension is wholly arbitrary and illegal as the petitioner had not been even put on trial and prior to that the prosecution had asked for withdrawal of the case against him which was duly allowed by the Court and was not a case where the accused had been acquitted after being given a benefit of doubt or due to shortcoming in evidence and was thus, therefore, entitled under law his full salary and emoluments.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner remained in jail from 3-1-1990 to 15-1-1990 during this period no suspension order was passed but after he had been released, the suspension order was passed on 26-3-1990.