STATE OF M P Vs. GYANPRAKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:-

(2.) THE brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that respondent plaintiff was appointed as Peon in Irrigation Department on 31-7-71. He was continued in the employment till 11-4-75. In the meantime he was arrested and prosecuted in criminal offence and thereafter on 18-7-79 he was acquitted from the charges of criminal offence. But in the meantime on 11-4-75 his services were discontinued. After acquittal in criminal case he filed suit for declaration that his termination order is illegal and the same is liable to be set aside and he is entitled for reinstatement with backwages. The Trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that he was temporary in the employment and his services were terminated on account of allegations that criminal case is pending against him and he is being prosecuted and the suit was dismissed. Thereafter the respondent plaintiff preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Court. The First Appellate Court allowed the appeal of plaintiff, set aside the judgment and reinstated the appellant in service with all back-wages against which the State has preferred this appeal which was admitted on the aforesaid substantial questions of law.

(3.) IT was held by the First Appellate Court that since the appellant was continued in service for more than three years he was entitled to be treated as quasi-permanent under the provisions of Rule 3 of M. P. Government Servants (Temporary and Quasi Permanent) Service Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'service Rules, 1960') and relied on the decision in the case of Purushottamlal Dhingra, reported in AIR 1958 SC 36.