Ram Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 29 July, 2016
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Rule 7.3
of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol. I Part I Chapter VII, in case of
removal, dismissal or compulsorily retirement or suspension or on
registration of criminal case, when a government employee is reinstated
upon having been acquitted, he shall be entitled to full pay and allowances
to which, he would have been entitled to, had he not been dismissed,
removed or compulsorily retired or suspended as the case may be. Learned
counsel further submits that the petitioner was falsely implicated and there
was no fault on his part and even the departmental proceedings were not
initiated against him. It is also the argument of learned counsel for the
petitioner that the action of respondents is malafide and discriminatory as
co-accused Nirmal Singh was reinstated with retrospective effect and
3 of 12
::: Downloaded on - 10-09-2016 20:35:11 :::
CWP No.22658 of 2014 4
granted all consequential benefits whereas the petitioner was reinstated from
the date of acquittal. At the end, learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated from the date he was suspended
till the period, he remained out of job as on duty along with all
consequential benefits including the arrears of pay. To support his
arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon judgments
of this Court rendered in Sucha Singh vs. State of Punjab and others,
CWP No.6131 of 2012 decided on 12.09.2013, Piara Singh vs. State of
Punjab and others, 2013(4) SCT 675, Bikkar Singh vs. Punjab Water
Supply and Sewerage Board and another, 2013(3) SCT 515, Shashi
Kumar vs. Uttri Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and another, 2005(1) SCT
576, Shiv Kumar Goel vs. State of Haryana and another, 2007(1) SCT
739 and Constable Piara Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others,
CWP No.9460 of 1999 decided on 02.09.2013.