GURBAX SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein seeks to challenge the orders dtd. 23/10/2013, 3/3/2015 and 4/12/2015 passed by respondents No.4, 3 and 2 respectively whereby the petitioner has been denied salary for the period from 10/11/2011 to 23/10/2012 when he remained out of service i.e. from the date of his dismissal from service till his reinstatement in service, by considering it as a period of duty without salary on the basis of no work no pay.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner herein would contend that the petitioner was nominated as an accused in FIR No.130 dtd. 1/8/2002 under Ss. 326, 324, 323, 149 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Phagwara, District Kapurthala. He stood convicted vide judgment/order dtd. 14/5/2010 passed by the JMIC, Phagwara but was acquitted in appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.16 dtd. 20/5/2010 preferred against the aforesaid judgment vide judgment dtd. 15/6/2013 passed by the Sessions Judge, Kapurthala. On acquittal of the petitioner, he was reinstated in service vide order dtd. 23/10/2013 passed by respondent No.4 from the date of his dismissal; however, he was denied the benefits of pay and allowances from the date of his dismissal to the date of his reinstatement in service. The petitioner challenged the order passed by respondent No.4 in appeal before respondent No.3, who vide order dtd. 3/3/2015 partly allowed the same and ordered to grant due benefits to the appellant (petitioner herein) from 15/6/2013 to 23/10/2013 i.e. from the date of acquittal of the petitioner till his reinstatement in service. The order dtd. 3/3/2015 was further challenged by the petitioner before respondent No.2, who while dismissing the appeal of the petitioner had also denied the relief that had been allowed to the petitioner by respondent No.3 of grant of pay and allowances from the date of acquittal till the date of his reinstatement in service. Against the aforementioned impugned orders, the instant writ petition has been filed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner had been dismissed from service wholly on account of conviction of the petitioner in the aforesaid FIR, however, he stood acquitted in appeal. It is submitted that no departmental proceedings on the basis of the said FIR were initiated.