SUNDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was appointed as a Die -set Pump Attendant in the Haryana Roadways at the Panchkula Depot and vide office order Annexure P -1 dated 2.3.1985 his services were regularised w.e.f. 15.9.1982. He was, however, placed under suspension w.e.f. 19.3.1986 vide order dated 10.4.1986. A First Information Report No. 101 dated 26.2.1986 was also lodged against him for having committed offences punishable under Sections 407, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. He was, however, acquitted by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ambala Cantonment, vide judgment dated 4.2.1998 with the observation that despite availing of 10 years time to lead evidence, the prosecution had been able to examine only five witnesses and that even these witnesses had given no evidence against the petitioner, with the result that he was not even called upon to give his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner was thereafter reinstated in service without prejudice to any decision with regard to disciplinary proceedings to be taken by the Department and a decision with regard to the suspension period was also kept on hold. The petitioner re -joined his service on reinstatement on 24.3.1999. The petitioner thereafter filed a representation to the respondents that as he had been acquitted because of lack of evidence, his service for the period he remained under suspension be regularised and his pay and allowances be released. Reliance for this claim was also placed on Rule 7.3 of the Punjab Civil Service Rules as applicable to the State of Haryana.

(2.) AT the time of hearing today, Miss Ritu Bahri, the learned Deputy Advocate General, again prayed for more time to file a reply. In the light of the fact that a number of adjournments had earlier been given to the State to do so, we declined the prayer.

(3.) PETITION allowed.