Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1309 (MP)

Brijesh Singh Kushwaha v. State of M. P.

2022-11-03

SUBODH ABHYANKAR

body2022
ORDER 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:- “(a) to call for the relevant records of the case; (b) to command the respondents to make payment of full salary and allowances for the suspension period i.e. w.e.f. 16.9.2014 to 24.10.2017 and to release arrears thereof alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. By a writ of MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, direction or order; (c) to command the respondents to make payment of full pension, gratuity, leave encashment and other admissible retiral dues to the petitioner and to release arrears thereof alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. by a writ of MANDAMUS or any other appropriate writ, direction or order; (d) to allow this petition with costs; (e) to pass such other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the fact and circumstance of the case to grant relief to the petitioner.” 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has already attained the age of superannuation but as the leave to appeal against the order of his acquittal is pending against the petitioner in M.Cr.C. No.45106/2019, the petitioner has not been released the benefits of full pension, gratuity, leave encashment and other admissible retiral dues and the petitioner's period of suspension has still not been regularized despite the fact that he was acquitted on 31.7.2019. In support of this contention, Shri Patne has also relied upon various judgements passed by the coordinate bench and Division Bench of this Court in WP No.8658/2018 dated 2.7.2018 in the case of Babulal Jhad v. State of M.P. and others, W.A. No.120/2019 dated 30.4.2019 in the case of State of M.P. and others v. Babulal Jhaad and in the case of Ram Ratan Tiwari v. State of M.P. and others reported as 2002 (4) MPLJ 401 and in WP No.9904/2011 dated 6.11.2012 in the case of Riyaz Ahmad Sheikh v. State of M.P. and others. The copies of the same have also been placed on record. 3. Counsel for the respondents/State has opposed the prayer, however, it is submitted that as a leave to appeal is still pending in the High Court against the order of the acquittal of the petitioner, pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits have been rightly withheld by the respondents. 4. The copies of the same have also been placed on record. 3. Counsel for the respondents/State has opposed the prayer, however, it is submitted that as a leave to appeal is still pending in the High Court against the order of the acquittal of the petitioner, pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits have been rightly withheld by the respondents. 4. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record as also the decisions rendered by the coordinate Bench of this Court in WP No.8658/2018 dated 2.7.2018 in the case of Babulal Jhad v. State of M.P. and others, relevant of the same reads as under:- “Having heard the learned counsel for parties and on perusal of the record, it is noticed that undisputedly the trial of the petitioner in the criminal case resulted into acquittal. Thereafter there is only an order of minor punishment of imposition of fine of Rs.10,000/-. The division bench of this court in the matter of Umashankar Choubey v. Union of India and others 2006(2) MPHT 471 taking note of para (d) of Administrative Instructions contained in OM dated 28.3.1959 and F.R.54-B(3) has held that where a government servant is deemed to be under suspension on account of his detention exceeding 48 hours for a criminal charge and he is acquitted of the charges and is reinstated without taking disciplinary proceedings against him, he has to be paid full pay and allowances for the period of suspension. In the other judgments in the matter of Dattatraya Vasudeo Kulkarni v. Director of Agriculture, Maharashtra & others 1984 Mh.LJ 406, Brahma Chandra Gupta v. Union of India (1984) 2 SCC 433 , Lehna Singh v. State of Haryana and another 1999 SCC OnLine P & H 1487, Ramsinhji Viraji Rathod, Parmanand Society v. The State of Gujarat and another 1970 SCC OnLine Guj 43 and Mohan Lal Vs. Union of India & Others ILR (1981) II Delhi 1037 also it has been held that if after revocation of suspension if only minor penalty is imposed then on revocation of suspension the employee concerned is entitled to the salary for the suspension period. Union of India & Others ILR (1981) II Delhi 1037 also it has been held that if after revocation of suspension if only minor penalty is imposed then on revocation of suspension the employee concerned is entitled to the salary for the suspension period. Counsel for petitioner has also placed reliance upon the subsequent circular of the GAD No.F-6-3-77-3-1 dated 15.9.1977 and has submitted that even in cases of termination on account of conviction by the trial court and acquittal in appeal the direction is to treat the period on duty and pay the full salary and allowance. In this regard, he has also placed reliance upon the judgment of Jharkhand High Court in the matter of Prasenjit Ghosh v. State of Jharkhand and others 2004 AIR Jhar 2134. Having regard to the aforesaid factual and legal position, I am of the opinion that the respondents are not justified in denying full salary to the petitioner for the suspension period. Hence, the impugned orders to that extent are set aside and the respondents are directed to pay difference of salary and allowances to the petitioner for the period he had remained under suspension. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.” 5. A perusal of the aforesaid decision clearly reveals that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision and in such circumstances, there is no justification in holding that the retiral dues of the petitioner to which he is entitled to as per the law. Resultantly, the petition stands allowed and the respondent No.1 is directed to make payment of the suspension period of the petitioner i.e. from 16.9.2014 to 24.10.2017 and to release the arrears along with the applicable bank rates within a period of four months from the date of certified copy of this order. The other retiral dues like full pension, gratuity, leave encashment and other retiral benefits be also extended to the petitioner within a period of four months. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.