SURINDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in the present petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 19.6.2004 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.2, whereby, the petitioner has been denied the benefits of past and future emoluments by declaring the period from 12.6.1993 to 29.10.2003 as "Out of Service Period".

(2.) Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the present petition, are that the petitioner was initially enrolled as Constable on 21.8.1991 and was posted at Police District Majitha. The petitioner could not report for duty from 15.5.1993 to 7.6.1993 and accordingly was discharged from service as per Rule 12.21 of Punjab Police Rules vide order dated 12.6.1993. The petitioner filed a civil suit for declaration to the effect that order dated 12.6.1993 was illegal, ultravires and was passed without holding any inquiry. Said civil suit was dismissed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Amritsar vide order dated 18.1.1999. Aggrieved by aforesaid order, the petitioner filed an appeal, which was allowed by the Additional District Judge, Amritsar vide judgment dated 8.12.1999 and order passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Amritsar was set aside. Against order dated 8.12.1999, respondent-Department filed Regular Second Appeal before this Court, which was dismissed on 30.7.2002 and order passed by the appellate Court was upheld. After dismissal of RSA by this Court, vide order dated 30.10.2002, the petitioner was ordered to be reinstated in service by the respondent-Department with a direction to hold fresh departmental inquiry for granting arrears of back wages to him. The petitioner joined duty on 30.10.2003 but since he was not given benefit of the period from 8.6.1993 to 29.10.2003, he filed Execution Application before the Civil Court. Objections to the Execution application were filed by respondent- Department. Regular Departmental Inquiry was also conducted and the petitioner was not found guilty of the charges framed against him but the absence period from 15.5.1993 to 7.6.1993 was treated as leave of the kind due and the period from 12.6.1993 to 29.10.2003 was treated as "out of service period" vide order dated 19.6.2004. The objections filed by respondents were allowed and execution application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Civil Court on 29.7.2011. Against order dated 29.7.2011, the petitioner filed Civil Revision but the same was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to challenge order dated 19.6.2004, which is subject matter of challenge in the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is entitled for benefit of period which has been treated as 'out of service' in view of Full Bench Judgment of this Court in Radha Ram Vs. Municipal Committee, Barnala and another 1983 PLR 21 , wherein, it has been held that once the relief of setting aside order of termination has been granted or a declaratory degree has been passed, the employee is entitled for consequential benefits. Learned counsel has also relied upon another Full Bench judgment of this Court in Parkash Chand Vs. SS Grewal, Chief Secretary, Punjab etc. 1974 (2) ILR (Punjab) 56 as well as judgment of Single Bench in C.W.P. No. 15348 of 1999 (Zuber Ahmed Vs. The Union of India and others) decided on 30.4.2015 , in support of his contentions.