Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from service law proceedings concerning the reinstatement and back wages of an employee who had been suspended and faced criminal prosecution. The State of Punjab and others filed appeals by special leave before the Supreme Court challenging an order of the Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court dated August 8, 1991, which directed reinstatement of the first respondent pending criminal prosecution. The appeals were heard together with Civil Appeal No.11460 of 1995 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.1356 of 1992. During the hearing, it was admitted across the Bar that the first respondent had been discharged by the Criminal Court for want of proper sanction, and as a result, he was reinstated in service in January 1988. Consequently, the Supreme Court held that the first respondent was entitled to full salary and allowances for the period during which he was kept under suspension. The court found that once the criminal prosecution had ended in discharge for want of proper sanction and the employee had been reinstated, the basis for withholding salary and allowances during suspension no longer survived. The appeals were accordingly disposed of, and no order as to costs was made. The judgment is a brief order that relies on the admitted factual position rather than a detailed examination of legal principles. It underscores the principle that an employee who is discharged in a criminal case and reinstated in service is entitled to full salary and allowances for the suspension period. The Supreme Court granted leave and passed the final order in favour of the respondent employee.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Reinstatement and Back Wages - Discharge in Criminal Case - Full Salary and Allowances - Not mentioned - The first respondent was directed to be reinstated pending criminal prosecution by the High Court. Before the Supreme Court, it was admitted that the respondent was discharged by the Criminal Court for want of proper sanction and was reinstated in service in January 1988. Held that the respondent was entitled to full salary and allowances for the period of suspension. The appeals were disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs (Para 1).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the first respondent, discharged by the Criminal Court for want of proper sanction and subsequently reinstated in service, was entitled to full salary and allowances for the period of suspension.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court granted leave and disposed of the appeals. It held that since the first respondent had been discharged by the Criminal Court for want of proper sanction and had been reinstated in service in January 1988, he was entitled to full salary and allowances for the period during which he was kept under suspension. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Discharge by criminal court for want of proper sanction
- reinstatement in service
- entitlement to full salary and allowances for suspension period
- leave granted
- no costs
