IMPORTANT POINT
A government servant acquitted in a criminal case initiated by a private party is not entitled to full salary for the suspension period under the principle of 'no work no pay'.

JUDGMENT :

Rajesh Shankar, J.

The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the office order as contained in memo no. 20 dated 06.01.2021 (wrongly typed as 06.01.2020) [Annexure-14 to the writ petition] passed by the respondent no. 2 – the District Education Officer, Hazaribagh to the extent the petitioner has been denied full salary except the subsistence allowance for the period from 03.01.2012 to 25.06.2015. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the respondents to pay full salary to the petitioner for the period from 03.01.2012 to 25.06.2015 in view of the fact that he has been acquitted in connection with T.R. No. 1969 of 2014, arising out of Sadar P.S Case No. 502 of 2011, corresponding to G.R No. 2208 of 2011 registered for the offences under Sections 379/411 of IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an FIR being Sadar P.S Case No. 502 of 2011 was lodged on 06.08.2011 under Sections 379/411 of IPC against unknown persons. The petitioner was apprehended in the said case on 06.09.2011 and was suspended from service with effect from the said date of arrest vide office order as contained in memo no. 2242 dated 15.09.2011. The petitioner was subsequently released from custody on 02.01.2012 after grant of bail vide order dated 21.12.2011 passed in B.A No. 8582 of 2011. Thereafter, he was acquitted in the said criminal case vide judgment dated 19.12.2014 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in G.R. No. 2208 of 2011 (T.R. No. 1969 of 2014). He then made representation dated 06.01.2015 before the respondent no. 2 for revocation of his suspension. However, his suspension was not revoked, rather a departmental proceeding was initiated against him and the respondent no. 2 vide memo no. 232 dated 10.02.2015 served a memo of charge in “Prapatra Ka” to him. Further, vide order as contained in memo no. 233 dated 10.02.2015, the respondent no. 2 appointed the Sub-Divisional Education Officer, Sadar, Hazaribagh as enquiry officer and the Headmaster, Hindu +2 High School, Hazaribagh as presenting officer for conducting the departmental proceeding.

3. The petitioner filed a writ petition being W.P. (S) No.789 of 2015 challenging memo of charge in “Prapatra Ka” as well as for revocation of the order of suspension issued by the respondent no. 2 vide memo nos. 232 and 233 respectively both dated 10.02.2015. During pendency of the said writ petition, the order of suspension of the petitioner was revoked vide office order as contained in memo no. 1167 dated 26.06.2015 passed by the respondent no. 2 stating that it was unanimously decided in the meeting of District Education Establishment Committee to make payment of only subsistence allowance to the petitioner for the period of suspension. The writ petition filed by the petitioner was disposed of vide order dated 25.01.2016 with direction to the disciplinary authority to conclude the departmental proceeding, however, without commenting on the merits of the case or interfering with the impugned departmental proceeding. Pursuant to the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 789 of 2015, the departmental proceeding initiated against the petitioner was concluded vide decision taken in the meeting held by District Education Establishment Committee, Hazaribagh on 30.04.2016, observing that recommendation of the enquiry officer to revoke the suspension of the petitioner and to pay him subsistence allowance for the period of suspension were already complied vide office order as contained in memo no. 1167 dated 26.06.2015 issued in the light of decision taken by the District Education Establishment Committee in its meeting held on 25.06.2015.

4. The petitioner filed another writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 123 of 2020 with a prayer for issuance of direction upon the respondents to pay him full salary for the period of suspension i.e., 06.09.2011 to 25.06.2015 which was disposed of vide order dated 06.02.2020 directing the respondents to take a decision in view