DHYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is seeking direction to the respondents for setting aside the order dated 02.03.2017 (Annexure P-7) whereby the period he remained out of job due to dismissal from service till his reinstatement, has not been treated as period spent on duty.

(2.) The petitioner was intially appointed as Inspector in the Haryana Roadways on 19.06.1985 He was promoted as Chief Inspector vide order dated 15.11.2002 (Annexure P-1). An FIR was registered against him on 16.06.2006 under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. This FIR was registered at the instance of department relating to his official work. In view of registration of FIR, the petitioner was suspended w.e.f. 21.06.2006 vide order dated 21.06.2006 (Annexure P-2). Order of suspension dated 21.06.2006 was reviewed by the Transport Commissioner and he was ordered to be reinstated vide order dated 30.01.2007 (Annexure P-3). The learned ASJ vide judgment dated 24.08.2009 convicted the petitioner and ordered him to undergo sentence for a period of one year. In view of above conviction, the petitioner was ordered to be removed from service vide order dated 06.07.2010 (Annexure P-4). The petitioner filed an appeal i.e. CRA No. 2123-SB-2009 against the judgment of conviction dated 24.08.2009 which was set aside vide order dated 10.08.2015 (Annexure P-5). Thereafter the petitioner was reinstated vide order dated 01.08.2016 (Annexure P-6).

(3.) The claim of the petitioner for grant of consequential benefits arising out of his acquittal was rejected vide order dated 02.03.2017 (Annexure P-7) and the period from 06.07.2010 to 09.08.2015 (i.e. from the date of dismissal to the date of judgment of acquittal passed by the High Court) was not treated as period spent on duty.