Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bala Ram vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. ... on 2 May, 2013
Author: Surya Kant
Bench: Surya Kant
LPA No. 478 of 2013 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
LPA No. 478 of 2013 (O&M)
Date of decision: 02.05.2013
Bala Ram
..... Appellant
Versus
Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others
..... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH
PRESENT: Mr. S.K. Sud, Advocate for the appellant.
SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)
CM Nos. 1253-1252 of 2013 For the reasons mentioned in both the applications, the same are allowed and delay of 26 days in filing and 248 days in re-filing of the instant appeal is condoned.
Both the applications stand disposed of.
LPA No. 478 of 2013 This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order dated 29.2.2012, passed by learned Single Judge, allowing the appellant's writ petition in part to the extent that the order of reversion has been quashed but back wages on the post of Junior Engineer have been denied LPA No. 478 of 2013 -2- to him for the period he remained out of service on account of his conviction in a case registered under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The facts may be noticed briefly.
The appellant was working as Junior Engineer (Field) in the respondent-Corporation. A case under Section 7 read with Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, was registered by the State Vigilance Bureau, against the appellant vide FIR No. 25 dated 27.10.1994. The appellant was convicted by the Special Judge, Jagadhri on 8.10.1998 and sentenced to undergo RI for a period of one year besides fine etc. As a result of his conviction in corruption case, the appellant was removed from service vide order dated 13.7.2000 (Annexure P-2) on the basis of his conduct which led to his conviction on the criminal charge.
The Criminal Appeal preferred by the appellant, however, was allowed by this Court vide order dated 22.10.2008 and he was acquitted by giving the benefit of doubt.
Consequent thereto, the appellant was re-instated in service. Since the appellant was also reverted from the post of Junior Engineer before removal of service, the learned Single Judge, vide order under appeal has set aside the order of reversion as it was passed without observing the principles of natural justice. The claim of the appellant for payment of arrears for the period when he remained out of service due to conviction in criminal case has been, however, declined by learned Single Judge and rightly so, on the strength of decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme LPA No. 478 of 2013 -3- Court referred to in para 4 of the order under appeal. Since the appellant could not have been allowed to work as Junior Engineer as he became disabled to continue in service due to his conviction on the criminal charge involving moral turpitude, the non-payment of arrears of pay for the period he remained out of service, is fully justified more so when the acquittal was earned by him as a result of benefit of doubt only.
In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the instant appeal and the same is dismissed.
( SURYA KANT )
JUDGE
May 02, 2013 ( R.P. NAGRATH )
rishu JUDGE