- (1.) THE petitioner is a primary school teacher. He was teaching in Indra Bhusan Baman Kumar Free Primary School, situated in the district of Uttar Dinajpur. At one point of time, a criminal case was lodged against him with Raiganj Police Station, being Case No.166/2005, dated 23rd May, 2005. A sessions case was later started and charge was framed against the petitioner and two other co -accused under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. By a judgment and order dated 18th May, 2012, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track (1st) Court, Raiganj, Uttar Dinajpur, the petitioner and two other accused were found not guilty in respect of committing offence punishable under sections 302/34 of the 2
(2.) INDIAN Penal Code, 1860 and were acquitted under section 235(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner had been placed under deemed suspension upon initiation of the criminal case, which was later revoked by the Chairman, District Primary School Council, Uttar Dinajpur, in terms of his memo dated 30th July, 2012. The petitioner was, thereafter, even promoted as a Head Teacher of Kothgram Free Primary School, in terms of a subsequent memo dated 19th December, 2012, issued by the Chairman, District Primary School Council, Uttar Dinajpur. He has since been functioning as a Head Teacher of the Primary School, as mentioned hereinabove. The petitioner has now approached this Court challenging the memo dated 17th April, 2013, issued by the Chairman, District Primary School Council, Uttar Dinajpur, whereby it was ordered that the period of absence of the petitioner was to be treated as period spent on suspension, as per Rule 13 of the West Bengal Primary Education (Conduct of Service of Teachers of Primary Schools) Rules, 2001. The question that has been posed before this Court is 3 whether the petitioner, having been honourably acquitted by a competent Court of law, was to be treated as absent during the period spent on suspension, or not. A report in the form of an affidavit was earlier directed to be filed on behalf of the District Primary School Council, Uttar Dinajpur, which has since been filed. Perusing the said report, it appears that the Council has merely reiterated the contents of the memo dated 17th April, 2013, and the provisions of Rule 13 of the West Bengal Primary Education (Conduct of Service of Teachers of Primary Schools) Rules, 2001. In sub -paragraph (e) of paragraph 2 of the report, it has been further stated as follows: "(e) That under the Rule 13(a) in that case it is specifically said that the petitioner would have been entitled that amount if he had not been suspended. But in that case the petitioner suspended with the allegation of criminal offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and so the prayer for quashing the impugned order dated 17.4.2013 passed by the respondent authorities and to pay the petitioner with his full pay and other allowances which he was in receipt of prior to his suspension is not sustainable under any statute." It appears from the above, that the Council has sought to distinguish the case of the petitioner on the basis of the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by him, only in order to justify the reason why the Council has not 4 allowed full pay and other allowances, which he was otherwise entitled to. It is to be now decided as to whether the gravity of an alleged offence committed by a teacher can be considered as a yardstick for the purpose of granting him/her full pay and other allowance, once he/she has been honourably acquitted by a competent Court of law. In order to find an answer, one may carefully look into Rule 13 of the West Bengal Primary Education (Conduct of Service of Teachers of Primary Schools) Rules, 2001 which has quoted hereinbelow, in its entirety: "13. Pay and allowances on reinstatement. - -When the suspension of a teacher is held to have been unjustifiable or not wholly justifiable, or when a teacher who has been dismissed, removed or suspended is reinstated, the disciplinary or appellate authority may grant to him for the period of his absence from duty - - (a) if he is honourably acquitted, the full pay to which he would have been entitled if he had not been dismissed, removed or suspended, and by an order to be separately recorded, any other allowance of which he was in receipt of prior to his dismissal, removal, or suspension, or (b) if otherwise, such proportion of pay and allowance as the disciplinary, appellate authority may deem fit.
(3.) IN a case falling under clause (a), the period of absence from duty shall be treated as a period spent on duty. In a case falling under clause (b), the period may be treated as on duty or leave but it shall not be so treated unless the disciplinary or appellate authority directs accordingly.;