Judgment Ajay Rastogi, J.- By this writ petition, petitioner has challenged validity of order dated 312.1990 (Annexure-5) whereby pay and allowances for period of suspension has been withheld, despite his discharge in criminal proceedings instituted for offences under Sections 161, IPC, 5(1)(d) and (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 ("the Act), under order dated 18.01.1990 (Annexure-4) of this Court in S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 330/1989. 2. Facts, in brief , are that while petitioner was posted as Medical Jurist in Government Hospital, Bundi in 1985, one Chhote Khan was involved in some quarrel with others wherein he, his sons Naeem and nephew Iqbal sustained injuries on 21.05.1985, so they were finically examined by petitioner, for which Chhote Khan wanted to obtain duplicate copies of injury reports. It was the case of petitioner that in fact Chhote Khan wanted to change gravity of injuries sustained on his son and nephew, which was not acceptable to petitioner and which resulted in causing annoyance to Chhote Khan, who in order to wreak vengeance, approached Anti Corruption Department with a complaint to get petitioner entrapped. 3. It was the case of petitioner that as per practise in medical department, if an urgent copy is needed to the applicant, he has to deposit Rs. 20/-per copy but Chhote Khan deposited only Rs. 10/-per copy and Rs. 30/-seized by Additional S.P. (ACD) during the trap on the complaint of Chhote Khan, in fact, was the amount delivered as deficit to requisite charges for duplicate copy of injury reports applied for by Chhote Khan, which was taken as per rules and practice and there was no question of taking any bribe. 4. Initially preliminary inquiry was made at the instance of the department through C.L. Verma Dy. CMHO as also by Dy. Director, Medical Department Kota Zone, who found nothing irregularity in accepting amount of Rs. 30/-as charges for duplicate copy of injury reports and made report to that effect. 5. After usual investigation, challan was filed against petitioner in the Court of Special Judge (ACD cases), Rajasthan, Kota and case was registered for offences under Section 161, IPC, 5(1)(d) and (2) of the Act. As a consequence thereof , petitioner was suspended under Rule 13 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 ("CCA Rules") vide order dated 07.01.1989 (Annexure-3). As a consequence thereof , petitioner was suspended under Rule 13 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 ("CCA Rules") vide order dated 07.01.1989 (Annexure-3). Petitioner moved an application for quashing criminal proceedings but the Special Judge (ACD) Kota framed charges for aforesaid offences vide order dated 31.03.1989, against which petitioner preferred Criminal Misc. Petition No. 330/1989 under Section 482, CrPC, before this Court. This Court vide order dated 18.01.1990 (Annexure 4) allowed misc. petition and quashed the charges and he was discharged from offences under Section 161, IPC, 5(1) (d) and (2) of the Act. 6. In view of the charges having been quashed by this Court (Supra), petitioner was reinstated in service vide order dated 312.1990 (Annexure 5) but while reinstating him in service, it was observed that for the period of his suspension, during which he did not report for duty at headquarters, he shall not be entitled for pay and allowances. However, rest of benefits flowing from order of his discharge passed by this Court, have been extended to him. Petitioner made representation to the authority and also furnished certificate (Annexure 14) that during the period from March, 1989 to January, 1991, he was neither in employment nor has undertaken profession, business. But despite the same, his pay and allowances during period of suspension was declined by respondents on the premises that he has not reported for duty at headquarters and remained absent. Hence, this petition. 7. Shri K.K. Sharma, Counsel for petitioner urged that once petitioner has been completely discharged of criminal offences for which they were charged by trial Court, vide order dated 18.01.1990 by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482, CrPC, he is entitled for full pay and allowances during period of suspension as provided under Rule 54 of Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 ("RSR") and as per requirement as provided under Rule 53 of RSR to submit certificate that he was not engaged in any employment, business, profession or vacation, despite having furnished such a certificate, respondents withheld payment of pay and allowances for period of suspension and such action of respondents is in violation of Rule 54(2) of RSR so also Article 14 of Constitution of India. In support of his submission, Shri Sharma placed reliance on the decision of Apex Court in Anwarun Nisha Khatoon vs. State of Bihar, 2002 (6) SCC 703 , so also of this Court in Kishanlal vs. State, (SB CWP 1059/79 decided on 05/04/1991) holding that there is no justification as per requirement of Rules for the delinquent to report for duty during period of suspension, and for want of which, pay and allowances cannot be withheld when there is complete exoneration of the charges imputed against him. 8. Respondents have filed reply to writ petition and inter alia submitted that since petitioner failed to submit his attendance before competent authority where he was supposed to report during suspension, therefore, while passing order of reinstatement dated 312.1990 (Annexure 5), the authority has rightly withheld payment of pay and allowances during period of his absence, but the same has been regularized by granting him leave, whatever was due to him. It has also been submitted that no certificate was furnished by him that he was not in employment anywhere during period of suspension, so his pay and allowances were rightly withheld by the authority in view of Rule 54(2) of RSR. 9. The petitioner filed rejoinder pointing out that all benefits including due promotions have been extended to him except pecuniary benefits for period of suspension, and despite having furnished certificate (Annexure 14) that during period from March, 1989 to January, 1991 he was not engaged in employment, business profession and vocation elsewhere, pay and allowances for such period has been illegally withheld by order dated 312.1990 (Annexure 5). It has also been pointed out in additional affidavit that because of period of suspension, increments have not been paid, only benefits given to him is of notional fixation vide orders dated 20.01.2004 (Annexure 15) and dated 03.02.2004 (Annexure 16) and on account of non-payment of salary and allowances for period of suspension, he has been deprived from other monetary benefits as is evident from order dated 07.02.2004 (Annexure 17). 10. I have considered rival contentions of both the parties and pondered over material on record. It is trite that an order of suspension of Government servant does not put an end to his services. 10. I have considered rival contentions of both the parties and pondered over material on record. It is trite that an order of suspension of Government servant does not put an end to his services. Early effect of suspension order is that though he continues to be member of Government service, but he is not permitted to work and further, during period of his suspension he is paid only some allowance generally called subsistence allowance, which is normally less than salary instead of pay and allowances, which one is entitled to, if he is not suspended. Thus, order of suspension does not put an end to the service of Government servant. Suspension merely suspend claim to the salary. Real effect of order of suspension is that though he continues to be in service, but he is not permitted to work and is paid only sustenance allowance. 11. As per Oxford Dictionary, "suspension" means action of debarring or state of being debarred especially for a time, form a function or privilege, temporary deprivation of ones office or position or again state of being temporarily kept form doing or deprived of something. The meaning of word, "suspend" given in dictionary is as to debar, usually for a time form the exercise of function or enjoyment of a privilege, especially to deprive temporarily for ones office, or again to interdict. 12. Blacks Law dictionary (6th Edn) gives meaning of "suspension" to mean temporary stop, temporary delay, interruption or cessation and a temporary cutting off or debarring one, as from privileges of ones profession. 13. In view of what has been stated above, during period of suspension, Government servant is not permitted to work and on the contrary he is temporarily kept away from his office, position or again to interdict. There is temporary withdrawal or cessation from employment and is discontinued with expectation for purposes of resumption; and asking for suspended employee to report for headquarter during his suspension period can be with an object that there is relationship of master and servant which is only temporarily interdicted; and provisions of Rajasthan Civil Services Conduct Rules, 1971 are applicable to the employee because he cannot make himself available in any other profession, employment, business or vocation as if he is not suspended. 14. Rule 53(2) of RSR reads as under:- Rule 53. 14. Rule 53(2) of RSR reads as under:- Rule 53. Subsistence grant: (2) No payment under Sub-rule (1) shall be made unless the Government servant furnishes a certificate, that he is not engaged in any other employment, business, profession or vocation: Provided that in the case of Government servant dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired from service, who is deemed to have been placed or to continue to be under suspension from the date of such dismissal or removal or compulsory retirement under Sub-rule (3) or Sub-rule (4) of Rule 13 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 and who fails to produce such a certificate for any period or periods during which he is deemed to be placed or to continue to be under suspension, he shall be entitled to the subsistence allowance and other allowances equal to the amount by which earnings during such period or periods as the case may be, fall short of the amount of subsistence allowance and other allowances that would otherwise be admissible to him, where the subsistence allowance and other allowances admissible to him are equal to or less than the amount earned by him, nothing in this proviso shall apply to him." 15. Thus, viewed, only requirement under Rule 53(2) of RSR is that payment of subsistence allowance will be made unless Government servant furnishes certificate that he is not engaged in other employment, business, profession or vocation. There is no rule otherwise available in the scheme of RSR which casts obligation upon suspended employee to report for duty or at headquarters which is ordinarily required for an employee in course of his employment. 16. Apart from examining Rule 53 of RSR, the Government made clarification which has been inserted vide FD Memo No. F1 (32) FD (Rules) 70 dated 04.06.1970 as under:-"A case has come to the notice of the Government in which a Government servant under suspension left his headquarters without obtaining prior permission of the competent authority. The suspending authority thereupon stopped payment of subsistence allowance to the Government servant concerned. The matter has been considered and it is clarified that suspending authority has no discretion to stop payment of subsistence allowance. A Government servant under suspension has to be paid subsistence allowance during suspension period. The suspending authority thereupon stopped payment of subsistence allowance to the Government servant concerned. The matter has been considered and it is clarified that suspending authority has no discretion to stop payment of subsistence allowance. A Government servant under suspension has to be paid subsistence allowance during suspension period. The competent authority may however, initiate another enquiry under provisions of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 against suspended government servant concerned, who has left the headquarters without permission of the competent authority. 17. Rule 54(2) of RSR reads as under:- "Rule 54. Reinstatement: (2) Wheresuch competent authority holds that the Government servant has been fully exonerated or, in the case of suspension that it was wholly unjustified, the Government servant shall be given the full pay and dearness allowance to which he would have been entitled had he not been dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired as a penalty or suspended, as the case may be." 18. Thus, according to Rule 54(2) of RSR where Government servant is fully exonerated, no discretion has been left with the authority from withholding his payment of salary, on the contrary it casts obligation and mandatory for competent authority to pay full pay and allowances, to which he would be otherwise entitled for, had he not been suspended. 19. In present case, no inquiry of any nature was ever initiated against petitioner during period of suspension when he is allegedly failed to report for duty at head quarters. It is a case where there is complete discharge of offences, for which criminal charges were imputed against him under Section 161, IPC, 5(1) (d) and (2) of the Act, under order dated 18.01.1990 passed by this Court in Cr. Misc. Petition No. 330/89. Once it was a case of total exoneration/discharge of criminal offences, in my opinion, under Rule 54(2) of RSR, the authority was under obligation to release his full pay and allowances to which suspended employee was entitled for and the decision taken by the authority for withholding pay and allowances merely for the reason that petitioner did not report to his head quarters during period of suspension, is contrary to provisions of Rule 53(2) read with Rule 54 (2) of RSR. 20. 20. Apex Court in Anwarun Nisha Khatoon vs. State of Bihar (Supra), while examining almost pari materia position as in Bihar Service Code held as under:-"There is no rule which requires a suspended employee to mark attendance. The respondents can at the most ask for a certificate that the appellants husband was not engaged in any other employment, business, profession or vocation. The appellants husband having died, he could not have furnished such a certificate. At no stage, have the respondents asked the appellant to give such a certificate. This grant of subsistence allowance cannot be denied on the ground that such a certificate was not given" 21. The appellants husband having died, he could not have furnished such a certificate. At no stage, have the respondents asked the appellant to give such a certificate. This grant of subsistence allowance cannot be denied on the ground that such a certificate was not given" 21. This Court in Kishanlal vs. State, (Supra), while taking note of decisions in Manager FCI vs. Khalil Ahmed, 1982 (2) SLR 779, and State of West Bengal vs. D.P. Bhattacharya, 1980 (3) SLR 136, observed as under:- blds vykok Hkh ;g ,d LohÑr rF; gS fd izkFkhZ dks vknsk fnukad 21-09-1974 }kjk fuyfEcr fd;k tk pqj tgka rd fuyEcu ds vknsk dk izkFkhZ us mldh oS/kkfudrk dks pqdk Fkk vkSu gS izuksrh ugha nh gSA l{ke vf /kdkjh dks vius v/khuLFk deZpkfj;ksa dks fu;eksa ds vuqlkj fuyfEcr fd;s tkus dk rk gSA tc dHkh fdlh deZoS/kkfud vf /kdkj gkspkjh dks fuyfEcr fd;k tkrk gS rks dsoy mls ok ls oafpr fd;k tkrk gS ysfdu mlds vkSj jkT; ljdkj ds chp fu;kstd okLrfod lsDrk vkSj fu;ksds lEcU/k lekIr ugha gksrsA fdlh Hkh deZpkjh dks fuyfEcr djus dk mís; lk/kkj.kr;k mls vius in ds dÙkZO; ls oafpr j[kuk gksrk gSA fdlh Hkh fuyfEcr deZpkjh dks vU; deZpkjh dh rjg dk;Z ugha djuk iMrk vkSj mls fdlh Hkh izdkj dk mÙkjnkf ;Ro ogu djus dk funsZk ugha fn;k tk ldrkA vr% Li"V :i ls fdlh deZpkjh dks fuyEcu dky ds nkSjku dk;Z ij mifLFkr gksus dk fd fuyEcu dky ds nkSjku fuyfEcr deZpkjh ij ;g jksd ugha yxkbZ tk ldrh fd og fcuk vkKk ds eq[;kokl ugha NksM+ ldrkA eSus mijksDr fu.kZ;ksa dk xgurkiqoZd v/;;u fd;k vkSj esjh jk; esa mijksDr fu.kZ;kas esa tks fu"d"kZ fudkyk x;k gS og oS/kkfud :i ls fcYdqy lgh gSA Li"V :i ls tc izkFkhZ fnukad 21-09-1974 dks fuyfEcr fd;k tk pqdk Fkk rks mls izfr fnu mifLFkfr nsus ds fy, ck/; ugha fd;k tk ldrk vkSj u gh mls dk;kofZ/k ds nkSjku dk;kZy; esa mifLFkr jgus ds fy;s funsZk fn;k tk ldrkA ;fn tkap Zdh dk;okgh ds lEcU/k esa mldh mifLFkfr vko;d le>h tkrh vkSj ;fn izkFkhZ vuqifLFkr jgrk rks fuf pr :i ls mlds fy, izkFkhZ mÙkjnk;h gksrkA fdUrq ek= vuqifLFkr jgus ds vk/kkj ij mlds fo#) vuqkklukRed dk;okgh fd;s tkus dk dksbZ vkSsZfpR; ugha gks ldrkA ,lh fLFkfr easizkFkhZ ds fo#) ikfjr fd;k x;k n.M dk vknsk oS/kkfud ugha dgk tk ldrkA 22. In this view of crystal position in Scheme of RSR, in my opinion, petitioner was not required to report for duty during period of suspension to the place of his head quarters and there is no rule contrary to it available in RSR for a suspended employee to report for duty, therefore, withholding of pay and allowances for such disputed period of suspension ( from 07.01.1989 to 312.1990), despite the fact that he has been completely discharged of criminal offences imputed against him, under orders of this Court, referred to supra, is contrary to the RSR as also in violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India. 23. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed. Order dated 312.1990 (Annexure 5) in so far as it withheld payment of full pay and allowances for the period from 07.01.1989 to 312.1990 is set aside and respondents are directed to release his full pay and allowances for the period in question with all consequential benefits; and accordingly orders, dated 20.01.2004 (Annexure 15) and 03.02.2004 (Annexure 16) stand modified to above extent. All exercise so as to comply with aforesaid directions be completed within three months from today, failing which petitioner will be entitled to interest @ 9% p.a. on the amount due in arrears from the date of its accrual till actual payment thereof. No order as to costs. funsZk Hkh ugha fn;k tk ldrkA vka/kz iznsk mPp U;k;ky dh ihB u s ,l-,y-vkj-ist 779] eas;g fu.kZSesa mifLFkr gksus vkSj mifLFkr vafdr dj dk;kofZ/tk ldrkA blh izdkj dydÙkk mPp U;k;ky; dh ihB us 1980 ¼3½ ,l-,y-vkj-ist 136] easfu.kZ; fn;k gS] 1982 ¼2½ fd fuyEcu dky ds nkSjku fdlh deZpkjh dks dk;kZy; k ds nkSjku mls mifLFkr jgus dk funsZk ugha fn;k