SARDARA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed as a Conductor with the Transport Department, State of Punjab on 12.10.1979. He was involved in an N.D.P.S case and was accordingly arrested on 30.3.2001. Petitioner was accordingly placed under suspension on 5.4.2001. The trial was conducted and in terms of decision dated 16.4.2002 passed by the Court of Special Judge, N.D.P.S Cases, Shri Ganga Nagar, Rajasthan the petitioner was convicted and was awarded a sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/-. The petitioner preferred an appeal against his conviction before the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan. During the pendency of the appeal the services of the petitioner were terminated by the respondent-department vide order dated 21.5.2003. It is not a matter of dispute that the penalty of termination was imposed upon the petitioner solely on the basis of his conviction in the N.D.P.S case. In terms of judgement dated 12.8.2008 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan the appeal preferred by the petitioner against his conviction was allowed. Consequently, the petitioner approached the respondent-department for recalling the termination order and for reinstating him in service. Apparently, the representation filed by the petitioner in such regard was filed by the Director, State Transport, Punjab in terms of order dated 6.3.2009 without assigning any reason.

(2.) The petitioner approached this Court in terms of filing CWP No. 12156 of 2009 impugning the order dated 6.3.2009. This Court in terms of judgement dated 12.8.2009 set aside the order dated 6.3.2009 and directed the matter to be considered afresh in terms of passing a speaking order. In compliance of the directions issued by this Court an order dated 11.1.2010 was passed by the Special Secretary, Govt. of Punjab, Transport Department, whereby the order of termination of the petitioner dated 21.5.2003 was set aside and the petitioner was directed to be reinstated in service. In terms of such order the period when the petitioner remained out of service was also ordered to be treated as period spent on duty. The suspension period of the petitioner was also treated as duty period for all intents and purposes. However, the petitioner has been held not entitled to be paid the salary for the period he was terminated from service up to his date of reinstatement. Such order dated 11.1.2010 was implemented and the petitioner has been allowed to join back in service w.e.f. 1.4.2010.

(3.) The challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 11.1.2010 (Annexure P-8) only to the extent, whereby the salary/arrears for the period from his date of termination to his order of reinstatement has been declined.