SIDHESHWAR PRASAD VIDYARATHI Vs. CENTRAL COALFIELDS LTD. AND ORS.
LAWS(JHAR)-2010-1-219
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on January 10,2010

Sidheshwar Prasad Vidyarathi Appellant
VERSUS
Central Coalfields Ltd. and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

N.N. Tiwari, J. - (1.) IN this writ petition, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 9/29.6.2010 issued by the Director (Personnel), Central Coalfields Limited, whereby the Petitioner is not held to be entitled for promotion, payment of ex -gratia, leave encashment and refund of penal rent.
(2.) IT has been stated that the Petitioner was in service of the Respondents. The Petitioner was allegedly caught red -handed while taking bribe from a contractor and for the said allegation a criminal case was instituted and the Petitioner was taken into custody on 2nd September, 1978. The Petitioner was subsequently tried by the Special Court, CBI. Patna in Special Case No. 17 of 1978 and was found guilty of the charge under Sections 5(1) and 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code. After his conviction he was also issued a charge -sheet by the Department. The Petitioner preferred an appeal against his conviction and also filed his reply to the charge -sheet. The Petitioner's appeal was allowed and his conviction was set aside by the judgment of Patna High Court dated 7.8.1998. However, the Petitioner, during pendency of the appeal, attained the age of superannuation and retired on 31.1.1994.
(3.) AFTER setting aside the judgment of conviction the Petitioner had claimed for his salary for the period he was put under suspension on the ground of custody and said criminal case and the Respondents had accepted the same and paid his salary for the said period. However, the Petitioner was denied his promotion, ex -gratia payment, leave encashment, etc. The Petitioner had filed a representation which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 9/29.6.2010 (Annexure -10) whereby the Respondents have rejected the Petitioner's claim by recording reasons. According to the Petitioner, the reasons assigned for denying the Petitioner's said claim is wholly arbitrary and is illegal. Once the Petitioner's services were deemed to be regularized by paying salary for the period of suspension, he was also entitled for his promotion, ex -gratia payment and leave encashment as also to refund of penal rent.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.