P.K. Mohanti, J. - (1.)THE Petitioner while serving as a Cashier under the Sub -Divisional Officer, Electrical No. 1, Bhubaneswar was placed under suspension with effect from 27 -9 -1968. (vide Annexur -1). The suspension was due to arrest by police for misappropriation of cash. On 22 -6 -1972 he was convicted under Section 409, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three months and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ -. On 23.6 -1972 a departmental proceeding was started against him for the misappropriation of cash. On 21 -12 -1972 he was dismissed from service with retrospective effect from 22 -6 -1972 on the ground of his conviction. On 28 -2 -1974 he was acquitted of the charge under Section 409, Indian Penal Code in Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 1972 on the finding that "there was no dishonest misappropriation or conversion or use, within the meaning of Section 405, Indian Penal Code" (vide Annexure 6). On 12 -6 -1974 he was intimated by the order in Annexure 8 that the dismissal would take effect from 21 -12 -1972 instead of 22 -6 -1972. On 24 -8 -1974 the order of dismissal was withdrawn on the ground of his acquittal, but he was directed to continue to remain under suspension pending finalisation of the departmental proceedings (vide Annexure 12). He made repeated representations for re -instatement in service but no order was communicated to him. His contention in this writ petition is that the order of suspension having been passed under Rule 12(b) of the Orissa Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules, 1962 it automatically stood vacated after his acquittal on 28.:.1974, but he has been illegally 'treated to have been continuing on suspension from the date of original suspension i.e., 27 -9 -1968. He prays for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the opposite parties to pay his full salary and allowances for the entire period from the date of his Original suspension till the date of disposal of this writ petition.
(2.)THE opposite parties filed counter contending, inter alia, that though the Petitioner was acquitted of the criminal charge and the order of dismissal was withdrawn, yet he continued to remain under suspension pending finalization of the departmental proceeding.
It is not disputed that the Orissa Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1962 are applicable to the employees of the Orissa State Electricity Board and that the suspension of the Petitioner was made under Rule 12(b) of the said Rules. The rule runs as follows:

R.12. Suspension -1) The appointing authority or any authority to which it is subordinate or any authority empowered by the Governor or the appointing authority in that behalf may place a Government Servant under suspension

(a) ...

(b) where a case against him in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation or trial.

(3.)SUSPENSION is an interlocutory action and it remains in force until the final disposal of the criminal proceedings. The legal position is well settled that where a Government servant has been suspended pending a criminal investigation or trial, the order of suspension automatically ceases to be operative as soon as the criminal proceedings terminate by an acquittal on discharge. Immediately after such acquittal or discharge in the criminal case, the delinquent should be deemed to have been reinstated and is accordingly entitled to recover his full pay and allowances since the date of suspension. See R.P. Kapur v. Union of India : A.I.R. 1964 S.C. 787. Om Prakash Gupta v. State of U.P. : A.I.R 1955 S.C. 600 and H.L. Mehra v. Union of India : A.I.R 1974 S.C. 1281.