Allowed

Tara Singh v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC20 May 2013CWP/3640/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside an order that denied the petitioner benefit of service for the period between his dismissal and reinstatement. The Court held that since the dismissal was illegal and he was exonerated, denying service benefits for that period was unjustified.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 21.12.2010 set aside; petitioner held entitled to service benefits for period 15.1.2007 to 15.1.2008, to be released within two months.

Tara Singh Vs State of Punjab — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3640 OF 2011 :{ 1 }:

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

DATE OF DECISION: MAY 20, 2013

¶4

Head Constable Tara Singh

¶5

.....Petitioner

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

State of Punjab and another

¶8

....Respondents

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

¶10

Present: Mr. Parshotam Lal Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶11

Ms. Monica Chhibber Sharma, DAG, Punjab, for the State.

¶12

¶13

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL)

¶14

Petitioner has approached this Court, impugning the order dated 21.12.2010, Annexure P-7, passed by Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga, vide which the period of his dismissal from 15.1.2007 till the date of joining i.e. 15.1.2008 has been ordered not to be counted in service because during this period he had not done any official duty.

¶15

It is the contention of counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was working as a Head Constable and was posted at

¶16

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3640 OF 2011 :{ 2 }:

¶17

Police Post Kishanpura, Police Station Dharamkot. One Kulwant Rai was going in his Tempo Traveller. On 5.12.2006, he received injuries due to an accident of Tempo Traveller and he was got admitted in Civil Hospital, Dharamkot. His wife, Sunita Rani, was taking care of him in the hospital, when on 6.12.2006 at about 7 P.M., petitioner reached Civil Hospital, Dharamkot in a drunken condition. He misbehaved with Kulwant Rani and his wife, Sunita Rani and gave beatings to them without any reason. Qua this incident, FIR No.276, dated 13.12.2006, under Sections 323, 354 IPC, was registered against the petitioner at Police Station Dharamkot.

¶18

On registration of the said FIR, the petitioner was dismissed from service under Article 311(2) (b) of the Constitution of India vide order dated 15.1.2007. Against the said order of dismissal, petitioner preferred an appeal, which was dismissed on 14.7.2007. The petitioner then preferred a Civil Writ Petition No.14659 of 2007, challenging the orders dated 15.1.2007 and 14.7.2007. This Court, vide order dated 5.11.2007, set-aside both the abovesaid orders. However, liberty was granted to the respondents to initiate departmental enquiry against him and take further action accordingly. Against the order of this Court dated 5.11.2007, a Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.16364 of 2008 was filed by State of Punjab, which was disposed of by the Supreme Court vide order dated 12.1.2009, Annexure P-3, stating therein that regular departmental enquiry should be held in the case of this nature in which the petitioner was

¶19

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3640 OF 2011 :{ 3 }:

¶20

involved and departmental enquiry be held as expeditiously as possible. In pursuance to the order passed by this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court, a regular departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner. In the enquiry, the petitioner was exonerated from the charges contained in the charge sheet. Even in the criminal case, which was registered against the petitioner, he was acquitted by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Moga, vide order dated 10.9.2008, against which the State did not prefer any appeal and the said order had attained finality.

¶21

In the interregnum period, the petitioner was reinstated in service on 15.1.2008 and, therefore, he was entitled to the grant of benefit of service from 15.1.2007, the date of his dismissal, till the date of his reinstatement i.e. 15.1.2008. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga, respondent No.2, vide his order dated 21.12.2010, Annexure P-7, has denied him the benefit of said service without any justification, only by stating that he has not performed any official duty during the said period. The counsel contends that the said order is not sustainable and deserves to be set-aside as the petitioner throughout was ready and willing to serve the respondents and as a matter of fact in the departmental enquiry as also in the criminal case, which was registered against him, he has been found to be innocent.

¶22

On the other hand, counsel for the respondents has argued that the principle of `no work no pay' has been made

¶23

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3640 OF 2011 :{ 4 }:

¶24

applicable to the case of the petitioner and since he has not performed any official duty during the period between 15.1.2007 to 15.1.2008, he has rightly been denied the counting of said service for any benefit. She accordingly contends that the writ petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶25

I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the records of the case.

¶26

Facts speak for itself that the petitioner was initially dismissed from service by resorting to exercise of extra ordinary powers under Article 311 (2) (b) of the Constitution of India without holding any departmental enquiry against him. This order was dated 15.1.2007, against which a statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 14.7.2007. The petitioner then filed Civil Writ Petition No.14659 of 2007, which was allowed by this Court vide order dated 5.11.2007, setting-aside the orders dated 15.1.2007 and 14.7.2007. Liberty was, however, granted to the respondents to initiate departmental proceedings against the petitioner. In the departmental proceedings, the petitioner has been exonerated of the charges levelled against him. Even in the criminal case, which was registered against the petitioner and was the basis for dismissing him from service, has resulted in his acquittal vide order dated 10.9.2008 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Moga. The above facts clearly depict that the petitioner had not

¶27

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.3640 OF 2011 :{ 5 }:

¶28

been terminated from service in accordance with law and, therefore, he has a right to continue in service. The orders, denying him the benefit of service from 15.1.2007 till 15.1.2008, the date when he was reinstated in service, cannot be said to be in accordance with law, especially when the said period was result of an action taken by the respondents, which was found to be illegal. The tenor of the order dated 21.12.2010, Annexure P-7, would have an effect of break in service of the petitioner, which can neither be said to be justified nor supported by any statute, especially when nothing has been found against the petitioner either in the departmental enquiry or in the criminal case registered against him. For the illegal act and conduct of the respondents, petitioner cannot be penalised.

¶29

In view of the above discussion, the present writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 21.12.2010, Annexure P-7, is hereby set-aside to the extent that the period from 15.1.2007 to 15.1.2008 has been treated as not to be counted in service. The petitioner is held entitled to all consequential benefits for the said period, which shall be released to him within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶30

May 20, 2013 khurmi

¶31

( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) JUDGE

Tara Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tara Singh v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhavna Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Chaman Lal Bhandari Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Jaspal Kaur etc. Vs State of Punjab etc.

Aksra Kumari Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jaswinder Singh Bedi etc. Vs State of Punjab etc.

Mohinderpal & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.