HARDEEP KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has filed this petition challenging the order dated 16/18.7.2013 (Annexure P -1) whereby she was removed from service on account of her conviction in a criminal case.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner was appointed as a helper on 4.8.2004. Services of the petitioner were regularized vide letter dated 25.8.2005 with effect from 4.8.2004. FIR No. 114 dated 4.7.2007 was registered against the petitioner under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Phase -1, Mohali. In this regard, petitioner faced trial and was convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court vide judgment/order dated 27.4.2013. In view of the conviction/sentence order passed by the Trial Court, petitioner was removed from service vide order Annexure P -1. However, in appeal, petitioner has earned her acquittal. Therefore, petitioner was liable to be reinstated in service. In this regard, petitioner approached the respondents vide Annexure P -4 but no action was taken on the same. Since the petitioner had been acquitted in the criminal proceedings, she was liable to be reinstated in service.

(3.) FACTS in the present case are not in dispute. Petitioner faced trial in FIR No. 114 dated 4.7.2007 and was convicted and sentenced qua commission of offence punishable under Section 420 IPC. On account of her conviction in the criminal case, petitioner was removed from service vide order Annexure P -1. Thus, it is not the case where the department had held any disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner before passing the order Annexure P -1. Rather, the petitioner was removed from service on account of her conviction in the criminal case. Petitioner filed an appeal against the judgment/order dated 27.4.2013 whereby she had been convicted and sentenced qua commission of offence punishable under Section 420 IPC. In appeal, the matter was compromised by the petitioner with the complainant party and, consequently, she was acquitted by the Appellate Court vide order dated 11.9.2013 (Annexure P -2).