Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.30 seconds)The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Jagmohan Lal vs State Of Punjab Through Secy. To Punjab ... on 18 August, 1966
8. The aforesaid judgment of the Madras High Court was considered
and followed by this Court in the case of Jagmohan Lal v. State of
Punjab through Secy. to Punjab Govt. Irrigation and others, AIR
1967 (54) Punjab and Haryana 422 (Punjab). In that case, on
acquittal, the petitioner was reinstated in service, but his period of
suspension was not treated as the period spent on duty. He had,
therefore, filed writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the
Constitution of India claiming that he was entitled to full pay and
allowances for the period of his suspension. Considering the impact
of Rules 7.3, 7.5 and 7.6 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Vol. I
Part-I, It was observed as follows:-
Union Of India (Uoi) vs Vasant Jayaram Karnik And Ors. on 7 September, 1970
9. The judgment rendered in the case of Union of India v. Jayaram
(supra) has also been followed by a Division Bench of the Gujarat
High Court in the case of Ramsinhji Viraji Rathod, Parmanand
Society v. The State of Gujarat and another, 1971 SLR 743. In the
aforesaid case, it has been observed as follows:
Maha Singh vs Haryana Tourism Corporation And ... on 1 October, 2013
In our this view, we are supported by the judgment of this Court in
the case of Maha Singh v. State of Haryana and another, 1994(1)
SCT 154 (P&H): 1993(8) Services Law Reporter 188.
Lehna Singh And Another vs State Of Haryana And Others on 5 September, 2012
Same view
was expressed by this Court in the case of Lehna Singh v. The State
of Haryana and others, 1994(1) SCT 173 (P&H): 1993(3) Recent
Services Judgments 119. Keeping in view the aforesaid, we have no
hesitation in holding that the impugned order cannot be sustained.
In terms of Rule 7.5 of the Rules, on petitioner's being acquitted, he
would be entitled to full salary and allowances for the period of
suspension and dismissal ..."
Paul Singh vs Punjab State Electricity Board on 24 January, 2012
To the same effect, there is another judgment of this Court in
CWP No.10808 of 2007; Paul Singh v. Punjab State Electricity Board,
Patiala, through its Secretary, and others; decided on 24.01.2012 wherein
it has been held as under:
Section 120B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Shashi Bala And Another vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam ... on 19 May, 2009
(emphasis supplied)
The expression "fully exonerated" has been considered and
interpreted by a Division Bench of this Court in Shashi Kumar v. Uttri
Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and another; 2005(1) SLR 659 while
observing as under: