An employee exonerated from charges and reinstated is entitled to subsistence allowance, notwithstanding prior absence, as per the NEEPCO Conduct Rules.

JUDGMENT :

Kardak Ete, J.

Heard Mr. A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Gayan, learned Central Government Counsel for the respondent No.1 and Mr. D. Senapati and Ms. S. Todi, learned counsels for the respondent Nos.2—8.

2. The challenge made in this writ petition is to the communication dated 06.04.2010, issued by the Deputy Manager (P & A), Esst., NEEPCO Ltd., Shillong, whereby, a decision has been conveyed to the petitioner that the period of long gap of absence of the petitioner is treated as break in service and not entitled to draw subsistence allowance owing to not reporting during the period of suspension.

3. Briefly put, the facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade-II of the North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited (in short ‘the NEEPCO’) vide order dated 08.04.1988 and joined his service at Doyang Hydro Electric Project (DHEP), Wokha at Nagaland on 27.04.1988. The petitioner was posted as Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade-I, on in-charge basis at Kopili Hydro Electric Project (KHEP), vide order dated 14.03.1991, on his own request wherein he joined on 25.04.1991. On 05.06.1991, the petitioner came to know that a police case has been registered against him on the basis of the written complaint made by the Security Officer of the DHEP, in respect of theft of fencing posts. The petitioner was arrested on 20.08.1991 and put behind the bar for more than 48 hours. The petitioner submitted a representation on 06.07.1991, before the respondent No.2, narrating his bad experience in DHEP. However, the petitioner was put under suspension w.e.f. 20.06.1991, vide order dated 11.10.1991.

4. The petitioner again submitted his joining report on 11.10.1991, stating that he could not join earlier because of intensive medical treatment, he had undergone, starting from 26.06.1991 in connection with the torture, which has been subjected to him by the senior security officer before handing him over to police in connection with the aforesaid Criminal Case. However, the same was returned for want of necessary medical fitness certificate.

5. The petitioner on 01.01.1992, submitted a representation tendering his resignation from the service stating his sufferings and unwillingness to serve the NEEPCO any further and prayed for clear his dues and other entitlement. Thereafter, a reminder was submitted with regard to his prayer for resignation on 12.02.1991.

6. In the meantime, the criminal case being Wokha P.S. Case No.4(4)/91, under Section 380 of the IPC, corresponding to G.R. Case No.34/91, against the petitioner was closed on the ground of insufficiency of evidence against him on 22.07.1993, by the learned Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Wokha. Thereafter, on 17.04.2001, after lapse of 9 years, the petitioner submitted an application seeking withdrawal of resignation letter which he has submitted on 01.01.1992. He submitted joining report again on 18.04.2001, which was forwarded to the competent authority.

7. On 27.02.2002, an order was issued by the respondent authorities to the effect that consequent upon the disposal of the criminal case against the petitioner, the competent authorities have accorded approval towards acceptance of the resignation of the petitioner w.e.f. 01.01.1992 after the suspension order was revoked.

8. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court being WP(C) No.4919/2002, challenging the suspension, not allowing to join in the service as well as acceptance of resignation of the petitioner after ten years of submission of prayer for resignation, co