- (1.) The prayer in the present petition is for quashing of order dated 27.06.2011 passed by respondent No. 2, whereby, the petitioner has been denied pay/arrears from the date of his suspension till the date of retirement consequent upon his acquittal in the criminal case. Briefly, the facts of the case, as mentioned in the petition, are that the petitioner joined his service in the Medical College, Rohtak, on 10.09.1971. The respondent-College was under the control of State of Haryana, Department of Medical Education. Subsequently, in the year 2008, the Medical College, Rohtak was converted into Medical Science University in the name and style of Pandit B.D. Sharma University of Health Science and all the employees working in the Medical College, Rohtak, were transferred to the University. The petitioner was working as an Accountant in the Medical College, Rohtak and thereafter, he was transferred to respondent No. 2-University. An FIR No. 79 dated 22.03.1995 was registered against the petitioner under Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and he was placed under suspension vide order dated 23.03.1995. On facing trial, the petitioner was convicted by the trial court and thereafter, he filed an appeal. However, on conviction, he was dismissed from service vide order dated 10.07.1998. During pendency of the appeal, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.07.2005. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of conviction was allowed and he was acquitted of the charge by the Appellate Court. He made various representations for releasing of his retiral benefits on his acquittal by the Appellate Court but nothing was paid to him. Ultimately, the retrial benefits were released to the petitioner but the period from the date of his suspension till the retirement, i.e. 23.03.1995 to 31.07.2005 was considered as non-duty period and no pay/arrears of non-duty period were given to him. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner to which he submitted his reply. The denial of non-payment of salary for that period and to treat it as non-duty period is a subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 27.06.2011 by raising various grounds that the petitioner was not found to be involved as charges levelled against him were not proved and the judgment of conviction was set-aside by the Appellate Court. It was found by the Appellate Court that the prosecution story was false and the witnesses produced by the prosecution were found to be interested witnesses. Learned counsel also submits that the order of suspension dated 23.03.1995 as well as the order of dismissal dated 10.07.1998 were withdrawn on acquittal of the petitioner. All benefits have been released to the petitioner but the period from the date of his suspension till the retirement i.e. 23.03.1995 to 31.07.2005 was considered as non-duty period.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Rules 7.3 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Vol. I Part-I. As per said rule, the petitioner is entitled for full pay and allowances and that period cannot be treated as absence from duty and the same is to be treated as period spent on duty.;