RAMESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sub Inspector Ramesh Kumar, presently posted at 13 Battalion, PAP, Punjab, Chandigarh through present writ filed by him under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari so as to quash order, Annexure p-6, dated September 2, 1993 passed by the Superintendent of police, Counter Intelligence, Amritsar vide which the period, the petitioner remained suspended i.e. from 27.3.1990 to 14.2.1991 has been treated as non-duty period by further holding that the petitioner shall not be entitled to receive any pay and allowances during the said period, in wake of setting aside of order, Annexure p-6, petitioner further prays that he be released all the increments to which he is entitled upto 19.6.1993 alongwith all consequential benefits. The relief, as noted above, is sought to rest on the facts that have been detailed in the petition and need a summary mention.

(2.) A complaint was lodged against the petitioner on 20.3.1990 and on the basis thereof he was put under suspension on 27.3.1990 vide Annexure P-l. A chargesheet was issued and Enquiry Officer was appointed. However, the enquiry could not be completed during the stipulated period and thereafter the Senior Superintendent of Police made a recommendation to the Director General of Police (Intelligence, Punjab vide letter dated 15.11.1990 that the petitioner be reinstated. Despite the orders, referred to above, when petitioner was not reinstated, he got issued a legal notice on 1.2.1991 and it is thereafter only that the department considered the case of the petitioner with regard to reinstatement and he was actually reinstated on 14.2.1991 (Annexure p-3). The Enquiry Officer thereafter submitted the report exonerating the petitioner from all the allegations that were levelled against him. It is the case of the petitioner that promotion was due to him during this period but inasmuch enquiry was pending against him, he was not promoted. He made a representation to the D.G.P., Punjab which was accepted on 30.10.1992 and he was accordingly promoted. However, salary as well as arrears for the suspension period were not released to him nor was he given the increments to which he was entitled to under the law. That being the position, he was constrained to get issued another notice and also made representation. He also appeared before the D.G.P., (Int.) but with no tangible results. He, however, came to know that the respondents had passed orders at his back on 2.9.1993 (Annexure P-6) that his suspension period be treated as non-duty period on the ground that he remained absent wilfully during the * triod of suspension from duty. It is the case of the petitioner that this order was never conveyed to his nor any explanation was sought for from him. A photo copy of the said order was made available to him in the month of May, 1995. It is in these circumstances that he was constrained to rake up the issue in this Court for the relief as already indicated above.

(3.) The basic facts, as have been enumerated above, have not been disputed and during the course of arguments, the cause of the petitioner has been opposed on the sole ground that the petitioner was wilfully absent from duly during the period of suspension and therefore, is not entitled to get any pay for the period he remained under suspension.