IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.B. Pardiwala, J.
Bhalchandra Lakshmishankar Dave – Appellant
Vs.
State of Gujarat and Ors. – Respondents
Special Civil Application No. 15902 of 2015
Decided On : 24-08-2016
Whether the writ-applicant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for in this writ-application.
Fact of the Case:
The writ-applicant was selected in the year 1980 by the Gujarat Public Service Commission for the appointment to Class-II post in the Labour and Employment Department. He joined as the Principal (Class-II) in the Government ITI, Saraspur, Ahmedabad, on 20th August 1982 under the Directorate of Employment and Training. On completion of the probation period of two years on 19th August 1984, he was appointed on the long term basis. While he was working as the Assistant Director (Training) and Incharge Principal (Class-I) in the Industrial Training Institute, Ankleshwar, an FIR was registered against him in the Bharuch ACB Police Station vide CR No. I-4/2000 for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1) (d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The filing of the charge-sheet culminated in the Special ACB Case No. 14 of 2000. It was alleged that the writ-applicant had demanded a sum of Rs. 5,000=00 from one Kalpesh Jashvantbhai Rana by way of illegal gratification and the said amount was accepted by him on 24th April 2000 in his chamber situated within the premises of the Government ITI, Ankleshwar. According to the case of the prosecution, the original first informant was serving as an Instructor in the Computer Training. The Principal Secretary, Labour and Employment Department, Gandhinagar, accorded sanction under Section 19 of the Act to prosecute the writ-applicant. The writ-applicant was placed under suspension by order dated 2nd June 2000. Later on, the order of suspension was revoked and the writ-applicant was posted as the Assistant Director (Training) in the office of the Director of Employment and Training. The State Government, in its Labour and Employment Department, also considered initiation of departmental inquiry. However, no departmental inquiry was initiated at any point of time. The Special Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Bharuch, held the writ-applicant guilty of the offence punishable under the provisions of the Corruption Act and passed an order of conviction and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years with fine of Rs. 5,000=00.
Finding of the Court:
The writ-applicant is not entitled to the reliefs as prayed for in this writ-application.
Issues: Whether the writ-applicant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for in this writ-application.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The writ-applicant was convicted by the trial Court for the offence punishable under the provisions of the Corruption Act and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years with fine of Rs. 5,000=00.2. The writ-applicant preferred an appeal before the High Court, which was allowed and the conviction and sentence were set aside.3. The State Government preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court, which is pending.4. The writ-applicant is not entitled to full back-wages with all the consequential benefits in that regard, as he was not wholly exonerated in view of the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court.5. The writ-applicant is entitled to provisional pension and provisional gratuity in accordance with the GCSR Pension Rules, 2002.6. If the appeal pending before the Supreme Court is dismissed and the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court is affirmed, then the writ-applicant shall be paid 50% of the salary and other allowances for the period between the date of the order of dismissal and the date of attaining the superannuation including other consequential benefits.
Final Decision: The writ-application is disposed of with a direction to the State Government to fix the provisional pension and the provisional gratuity within a period of two months from the date of the receipt of the order and pay the requisite amount with arrears.
J.B. Pardiwala, J.
1. By this writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant, a former Government servant, has prayed for the following reliefs:
"(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, quashing and setting aside the order of dismissal dated 14.3.2005 at Annexure-P, holding that the said order of dismissal was void ab initio and that the petitioner was entitled to continue in service till he attained the age of superannuation;
(B) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to hold and declare that the petitioner is entitled to all the benefits of reinstatement in service till the date he was due to retire on 28.2.2012, and be pleased to further direct the respondents to grant him the benefits flowing from the judgments of this Hon'ble Court in Special Civil Application No. 1629/1989 and 3938/1992;
(C) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to pay the arrears of salary of the petitioner from the date of his dismissal from service till 28.2.2012 and also to pay pension and gratuity and other benefits due to him as if he had continued in service till 28.2.2012;
(D) Pending hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to pay provisional pension to the petitioner on the basis of the last salary drawn by the petitioner;
(E) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this petition with costs."
2. The case of the writ-applicant may be summarised as under:
"The writ-applicant was selected in the year 1980 by the Gujarat Public Service Commission for the appointment to Class-II post in the Labour and Employment Department. He joined as the Principal (Class-II) in the Government ITI, Saraspur, Ahmedabad, on 20th August 1982 under the Directorate of Employment and Training. On completion of the probation period of two years on 19th August 1984, he was appointed on the long term basis. While he was working as the Assistant Director (Training) and Incharge Principal (Class-I) in the Industrial Training Institute, Ankleshwar, an FIR was registered against him in the Bharuch ACB Police Station vide CR No. I-4/2000 for the offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(1) (d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The filing of the charge-sheet culminated in the Special ACB Case No. 14 of 2000. It was alleged that the writ-applicant had demanded a sum of Rs. 5,000=00 from one Kalpesh Jashvantbhai Rana by way of illegal gratification and the said amount was accepted by him on 24th April 2000 in his chamber situated within the premises of the Government ITI, Ankleshwar. According to the case of the prosecution, the original first informant was serving as an Instructor in the Computer Training. The Principal Secretary, Labour and Employment Department, Gandhinagar, accorded sanction under Section 19 of the Act to prosecute the writ-applicant. The writ-applicant was placed under suspension by order dated 2nd June 2000. Later on, the order of suspension was revoked and the writ-applicant was posted as the Assistant Director (Training) in the office of the Director of Employment and Training. The State Government, in its Labour and Employment Department, also considered initiation of departmental inquiry. However, no departmental inquiry was initiated at any point of time. The Special Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Bharuch, held the writ-applicant guilty of the offence punishable under the provisions of the Corruption Act and passed an order of conviction and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years with fine of Rs. 5,000=00."
3. Since the trial Court convicted the writ-applicant holding him guilty of the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the writ-applicant was ordered to be dismissed from service vide order dated 6th September 2005. The order of dismissal was made the subject matter of c
Ahmadkhan Inayatkhan v. District Superintendent of Police
Deputy Director of Collegiate Education (Administration), Madras v. S. Nagoor Meera
D.M. Gohil v. State of Gujarat and others
Deputy Inspector General of Police v. S. Samuthiram
Divl. Personnel Officer v. T.R. Challappan
Gopalkrishna v. State of M.P. AIR 1968 SC 240
Kiritkumar D. Vyas v. State & Ann
Management of Reserve Bank of India, New Delhi v. Bhopal Singh Panchal
P.D. Waghela & Ors. v. G.C. Raiger
Vidya Charan Shukla v. Purshottam Lal Kaushik
V.R. Gokhale v. State of Maharashtra. ILR (1963) Bom 537 : AIR 1963 Bom 137
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.