PREM SINGH Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The moot question for adjudication in the present writ petition is that the period spent by the petitioner in jail consequent upon his conviction and sentence in a case under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code ordered by Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla has to be counted for the purpose of continuity in service and consequently regularisation as Beldar.

(2.) Learned counsel representing the petitioner has forcefully contended that in view of the petitioner was acquitted by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.71/2001, he preferred against the judgment passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla in Sessions Trial No.5-S/7 of 1999, the period he spent in jail has to be counted towards continuity in service and regularisation as Beldar. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General while repelling the submissions so made on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the period of 27 months the petitioner spent in jail cannot be counted for regularisation of his service as Beldar as he was not disengaged by the respondents nor there exists any provision under the Industrial Disputes Act warranting counting of the period spent in jail towards continuity in service.

(3.) Having gone through the record and the submissions made on both sides, no doubt the petitioner was engaged as Beldar on daily wage basis in Jan., 1996 and continued as such till 11.1.2001. He, however, was convicted in Sessions Trial No.5-S/7 of 1999 by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code on 12.1.2001 and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. In an appeal registered as Criminal Appeal No. 71/2001 preferred before this Court against his conviction and sentence, the petitioner, however, was acquitted from the charge on 10.4.2003. On an application he submitted for his re-engagement, the petitioner was re-engaged as Beldar in Nov., 2003. Since then he is continuing as Beldar till date. No Rule, instructions or provisions of law have been brought to the notice of this Court warranting counting of 27 months spent by the petitioner in jail pursuant to his conviction and sentence in a criminal case. Otherwise also he being a Beldar working on daily wage basis and not against any vacancy or post cannot be treated at par the regular employee. It cannot be believed that he was innocent or impleaded in the criminal case falsely for the reason that he was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, no doubt acquitted by this Court, however, for want of cogent and reliable evidence. The respondent-State by re-engaging him w.e.f. Nov. 2003 has already taken a sympathetic and lenient view of the matter. I thus find no substance in the claim of the petitioner that the period of 27 months he spent in jail should have been counted towards continuity in service and he is entitled for regularisation as Beldar w.e.f. 2004. He cannot claim himself to be a person similarly situated to Bitu Pal, Purshotam Singh and Diwan Chand, as in their case there was no break in service and rather they were regularised on fulfilment of the criteria prescribed therefor. The petitioner seems to have now completed 8 years service continuously. If it is so, it is expected from the respondents that they will regularise his services in accordance with the policy framed in this regard.