has to be reinstated in service granting him all the benefits. The petitioner relies on the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court reported in State of Kerala v. Joseph [2015 (1) KLT 56 (F.B)], wherein the question regarding pay and allowances to employees during the period of absence consequent to conviction till reinstatement, on acquittal, was considered and it was held that such employees are entitled to full back wages on reinstatement. In this case, even assuming that proceedings were initiated on the basis of the direction by the Government, such proceedings were initiated only on the basis of the fact that the petitioner was convicted in the criminal case. Ext.P1 as well as Ext.P4 make it clear that the petitioner was never involved in any offence during his service career. In the above circumstances, the proceedings if any, initiated against the petitioner - Ext.P1, which culminated in Ext.P4, cannot stand. Moreover, once the KSRTC themselves found that the petitioner was entitled to reinstatement, then there was no reason for awarding a punishment of compulsory retirement on him. Petitioner was entitled to continue in service till the date of his superannuation, which was to fall on 31.1.2006. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to have an order in his favour allowing him to continue
