Regularization of services cannot be denied indefinitely due to pending criminal proceedings, emphasizing the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

JUDGMENT :

Sandeep Sharma, J.

1. Petitioner herein, is aggrieved by the action of Scrutiny Committee, constituted by Deputy Commissioner, Kangra, for the regularization of contractual appointees, wherein though his name along with other eligible persons was considered for regularization, after completion of requisite period, but he has been left out from regularization on account of pendency of FIR. On 09.05.2016, petitioner was appointed as Patwari on contract basis, however, in 2017, a complaint came to be filed against him, levelling therein allegations of bribe for providing a copy of Jamabandi. On the basis of aforesaid complaint, Vigilance Department registered an FIR No. 4 of 2017, dated 18.11.2017, under Sections 7 and 13(2) of prevention and corruption Act, at Police Station State Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. Though petitioner herein was arrested in the aforesaid case, but subsequently he was released on bail by the learned Special Judge, Dharamshala, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. Services of the petitioner were terminated vide order dated 29.11.2017.

2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with aforesaid termination order, petitioner herein preferred OA(D) No. 372 of 2017 before the erstwhile HP State Administrative Tribunal, which came to be disposed of on 12.04.2018. Vide aforesaid order, erstwhile HP Administrative Tribunal set aside the termination order on the ground that impugned termination of the petitioner was penal in nature and had been passed without conducting any inquiry. Though in terms of aforesaid order, petitioner was reinstated, but departmental proceedings came to be initiated against him. On 06.07.2018, petitioner again joined the services. In the year 2019, Deputy Commissioner, Kangra, constituted Scrutiny Committee under the chairmanship of Mr.Devi Chand Thakur, District Revenue Officer, Kangra at Dharamshala, Himachal Pradesh, to scrutinize the documents of contractual appointees for the regularization. Though Scrutiny Committee in its meeting held on 28.03.2019 (Annexure R-6), recommended the name of the petitioner subject to outcome of criminal case pending against him, but fact remains that till date he has not been regularized and as such, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for the following main relief:-

“(i) That the impugned action of the respondent of not regularizing the services of the petitioner from the due date i.e. 2019 when he has completed three years as per the policy of regularization of employees applicable in Himachal Pradesh, may kindly be quashed and set aside with a direction to the respondents to regularized his service from due date with all consequential benefits like arrears of pay, seniority and further promotion etc.”

3. Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by Mr. Virender Thakur, learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that regularization of the petitioner cannot be delayed on account of pendency of criminal as well as disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, rather order of regularization could have been passed by the authorities subject to outcome of criminal proceedings, which was otherwise recommended by the Committee itself. To support his aforesaid arguments, Mr. Thakur, invited attention of this Court to judgment dated 26.09.2023 passed by this Court in CWP No. 4719 of 2022 titled as Vinod Kumar Pal Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors., wherein, under similar facts & circumstances, this Court directed the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner in the aforesaid case from the date he completed the requisite service along with consequential benefits subject to outcome of the criminal proceedings initiated against him.

4. To the contrary, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General, while supporting the impugned action of respondents inasmuch as not regularizing the pet