JARNAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Jarnail Singh through present writ filed by him under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeks writ in the nature of quo warranto by styling the appointment of respondent No. 5 Hari Singh on the post of Principal Guru Nanak Dev Engineering College, Ludhiana as wholly illegal. In consequence of declaring appointment of respondent No. 5 as illegal, the petitioner further prays that his suspension order by the said respondent as also aftermath thereof i.e. inquiry ordered by him be also quashed.

(2.) In view of the interim order passed by the motion Bench while admitting the petition on March 6,1995 and in view of the fact that after April 30,1995, a principal other than Hari Singh has been appointed the petitioner with regard to main relief has become infructuous. The interim order referred to above reads thus:

(3.) It is the conceded position that respondent Hari Singh was not given any extension in April 1996 and, in fact, new principal was appointed. The relief that still survives is with regard to suspension of the petitioner which was ordered by respondent No. 5. The learned counsel for the parties have informed the Court that the respondent-College had sought approval of the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Department of Education for keeping the petitioner under suspension for a period exceeding six months as was statutorily required under Sec. 2-B of the Punjab Affiliated Colleges (Security of Service) Act, 1974. For the reason that approval to keep petitioner under suspension for a period exceeding six months has not been given by the concerned authority, the petitioner shall have to be taken in service and if not taken into service by now, be taken forthwith. It is again not disputed that an employee whose suspension exceeding six months has not been approved is entitled to wages of the salary for the period subsequent to the expiry of six months of his suspension. While interpreting pari materia provision of Haryana Affiliated Colleges (Security of Service) Act, 1979, this was opined by the Division Bench of this Court in Hindu Education Society (Regd.) Society Rohtak and others Vs. Shyam Sunder Pasrija and others, 1995(1) R.S.J. 540. Let the petitioner be paid his salary of the period beyond six months of his suspension.