Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dewaji Gaikwad (since deceased, represented by legal heirs), was an Assistant Teacher in Zilla Parishad Primary School. He was arrested on 27 March 1995 in connection with a murder case and suspended with effect from the same date. After his acquittal in the criminal case on 10 January 1997, he was reinstated. A departmental enquiry was initiated; the Special Enquiry Officer exonerated him, but the Chief Executive Officer ordered a fresh enquiry, which found him guilty. On 12 April 1999, the CEO imposed punishment of withholding one increment and treating the suspension period as suspension period. The petitioner retired on 28 February 1999. He appealed to the Commissioner, who on 31 December 1999 set aside the increment punishment but maintained the suspension period as suspension period. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The court heard arguments from both sides. The court observed that since the petitioner was exonerated in both the criminal case and the departmental enquiry (the fresh enquiry was set aside by the Commissioner), the suspension period ought to be treated as duty period for all purposes, including pensionary benefits. The court directed the respondents to treat the suspension period as duty period and grant consequential benefits to the legal heirs within three months.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Suspension Period - Treatment of Suspension Period - Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis (Disciplinary) Rules, 1964 - Petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, was suspended due to involvement in a murder case, later acquitted and exonerated in departmental enquiry - The Commissioner partly allowed appeal by setting aside punishment of withholding increment but maintained suspension period as suspension period - Court held that when an employee is exonerated, the suspension period should normally be treated as duty period for all purposes including pensionary benefits - Directed respondents to treat suspension period as duty period and grant consequential benefits (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suspension period of the petitioner, who was exonerated in criminal case and departmental enquiry, should be treated as duty period for pensionary benefits.
Final Decision
The petition is partly allowed. The order dated 31-12-1999 passed by respondent no.2 is quashed and set aside to the extent it treats the suspension period as suspension period. The respondents are directed to treat the suspension period of the petitioner from 27-03-1995 to 10-01-1997 as duty period for all purposes including pensionary benefits. Consequential benefits to be paid to the legal heirs within three months.
Law Points
- Suspension period treatment
- departmental enquiry
- natural justice
- pensionary benefits
- Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis (Disciplinary) Rules
- 1964
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (01) 132
Writ Petition No.1448 of 2000
B.P. Dharmadhikari, Mrs. Swapna Joshi
Mr. Anand Parchure, Mr. Rohit Vaidya for petitioners; Mr. P.S. Tembhare, AGP for respondent no.2
Dewaji s/o Dasaru Gaikwad (deceased through legal heirs Smt. Kamla wd/o Dewaji Gaikwad and Anil s/o Dewaji Gaikwad)
Zilla Parishad Bhandara through its Chief Executive Officer, Commissioner Nagpur Division, Zilla Parishad Gondia through its Chief Executive Officer
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging orders regarding treatment of suspension period and punishment of withholding increment.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of orders dated 12-04-1999 and 31-12-1999 and direction to treat suspension period as duty period for pensionary benefits.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner which maintained suspension period as suspension period despite exoneration.
Previous Decisions
CEO order dated 12-04-1999 imposed punishment of withholding one increment and treating suspension period as suspension period; Commissioner order dated 31-12-1999 set aside the increment punishment but maintained suspension period as suspension period.
Issues
Whether the suspension period of an employee exonerated in criminal and departmental proceedings should be treated as duty period for pensionary benefits.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that since he was exonerated in the criminal case and departmental enquiry, the suspension period should be treated as duty period.
Respondents argued that the Commissioner's order was correct in treating suspension period as suspension period.
Ratio Decidendi
When an employee is exonerated in both criminal and departmental proceedings, the suspension period should normally be treated as duty period for all purposes, including pensionary benefits, as the employee is deemed to have been ready and willing to serve.
Judgment Excerpts
The petition is being prosecuted by widow of Dewaji Gaikwad who expired on 18042015.
The petitioner was acquitted of the charge of murder, on 10011997 he was reinstated in service.
The Special Enquiry Officer after careful scrutiny exonerated the petitioner from all the charges.
The respondent no.2 revoked the punishment of withholding one increment. However, he maintained the order of treating suspension period as suspension period.
In the result, the petition is partly allowed.
Procedural History
Petitioner was suspended on 27-03-1995, acquitted on 10-01-1997, reinstated. Departmental enquiry exonerated him, but fresh enquiry found guilty. CEO imposed punishment on 12-04-1999. Petitioner retired on 28-02-1999. Appeal to Commissioner resulted in order dated 31-12-1999. Writ petition filed in 2000. Petitioner died on 18-04-2015, legal heirs substituted. Judgment delivered on 09-01-2017.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis (Disciplinary) Rules, 1964:
