Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: honourable acquittal in Valjibhai Mithabhai Solanki vs State Of Gujarat on 31 March, 2022Matching Fragments
5.3 Even relying on the order of revocation of suspension of the year 2007 viz. 18.08.2007, the petitioner would submit that, that order was subject to outcome of the appeal and the petitioner had filed an undertaking.
C/SCA/4014/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/03/2022
6. Mr.Dipak Dave learned counsel appearing for the respondent company referring to the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the company, would indicate that the order of the criminal court was not an order of honourable acquittal. It was an acquittal based on benefit of doubt. That being so, in accordance with Chapter-8 of the Established Manual of the Gujarat Electricity Board, on an assessment of the judgment of the Criminal Court, it was found that acquittal on basis of benefit of doubt cannot be considered 'honourable acquittal' and therefore the order granting acquittal financial benefits stood withdrawn. 6.1 Inviting the attention of the Court to the order of 28.12.2018, Mr.Dave would submit that in fact, the order initially was for regularizing the period of suspension without financial benefits but, it was based on some instructions from the Head of the Department which were, in fact, never issued when the order was modified without authority of law by a C/SCA/4014/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/03/2022 communication of 01.01.2019. It is in background of these circumstances and especially when regulation 241(2) of the Service Regulations are read, that the order is just and proper.
9. Mr.Kinariwala's submission relying on Clause-36 of this General Standing Orders to submit that the recovery cannot be made unless there is a departmental proceedings of the charge-sheet, is also misconceived. That submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner was on a part reading of the clause and not when the same is read in complete manner. It is only on an employer coming to a conclusion that there is misapprehension of laws of the company, is a case when a charge-sheet has to be issued. On the contrary, when the first part of the clause is read, it specifically entitles the employer to recover any wrongful payment made to the employee, of course, on suitable installments. This is not a case where the petitioner can take the benefit of a mistake which is not corrected for a long time. Admittedly, it is so corrected within a period of one and a half year. C/SCA/4014/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/03/2022 Even otherwise, when the resolution read with the establishment manual Chapter-8 provides for assessment of the judgment of the Criminal Court and the benefit of regularization of the period of suspension is only on the basis of an honourable acquittal, which was not the case on hand, the petitioner could not have claimed actual financial benefits for the period in question. The Supreme Court in a decision in case of Union of India v. Methu Meda reported in JT 2021 (10) SC 11 has considered the concept and meaning of acquittal and the expression "honourable acquittal".
15. Recently, this Court in Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration and Ors. vs. Pradeep Kumar and Anr. (2018) 1 SCC 797, relying upon the judgment of S. Samuthiram (supra) said that acquittal in a criminal case is not conclusive of the suitability of the candidates on the post concerned. It is observed, acquittal or discharge of a person cannot always be inferred that he was falsely involved or he had no criminal antecedent. The said issue has further been considered in Mehar Singh (supra) holding non-examination of key witnesses leading to acquittal is not honourable acquittal, in fact, it is by giving benefit of doubt. The Court said nature of acquittal is necessary for core consideration. If acquittal is not honourable, the candidates are not suitable for government service and are to be avoided. The relevant factors and the nature of offence, extent of his involvement, propensity of such person to indulge in similar activities in future, are the relevant aspects for consideration by the Screening Committee, which is competent to decide all these issues.
38.11. Before a person is held guilty of suppressio veri or suggestio falsi, knowledge of the fact must be attributable to him."
11. Expression "honourable acquittal" and the term C/SCA/4014/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 31/03/2022 "benefit of doubt" has been discussed and the observations of the Supreme Court would indicate that such acquittal which is on the basis of a benefit of doubt cannot be treated as "honourable acquittal"