An employee's honourable acquittal entitles them to full salary for the suspension period as per Regulation 43 of the OSFC Staff Regulations, 1975.

JUDGMENT

Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ. - 1. The Petitioner, an erstwhile Deputy Manager (Finance) working at the Jeypore Branch of the Odisha State Financial Corporation (OSFC) has filed this writ petition questioning an office order dated 6th October, 2004 issued by the General Manager, OSFC placing the Petitioner under suspension with effect from 4th November, 2003 in terms of Regulation 43 (1) of the OSFC Staff Regulations, 1975 (Regulations). The Petitioner has also prayed for quashing of a decision dated 26th December, 2005 taken by the Board of Directors of OSFC at their 338th meeting to treat the Petitioner's period of suspension from 4th November, 2003 to 24th May, 2005 "as such with pay and allowance already released in your favour without any change." It is further prayed that a direction be issued to the Opposite Parties to release the Petitioner's unpaid salary for the months of November and December, 2003 and the entire salary for the period of suspension from 4th November, 2003 to 24th May, 2005 by treating the same as duty, in lieu of his acquittal in G.R. Case No.608 of 2003.

2. Notice was issued in this petition on 30th March, 2005. The petition was also permitted to be amended by an order dated 24th July, 2017 of this Court.

3. The background facts are that while the Petitioner was working as Deputy Manager (Finance) in the Jeypore Branch of OSFC, one Umakanta Pati lodged an FIR against the Petitioner at Kendrapara Police Station on 2nd November, 2003. The complaint was that the Petitioner had established an industry under the name of Tulasi Steel Industry in village Danpur in 2001 in which the complainant had invested Rs.1,32,000/-. The Petitioner was stated to have subsequently sold the unit without informing the complainant. On 10th October, 2003 when the complainant and one Fakir Barik went to the house of the Petitioner and asked him to return the money, the Petitioner refused. He is alleged to have abused and threatened to kill them.

4. On the basis of the above FIR, the Petitioner was arrested on 4th November, 2003 and produced before the Court on 5th November, 2003. He was released on bail by the S.D.J.M., Kendrapara by an order dated 15th November, 2003.

5. On 29th December, 2003 the police furnished the final form/charge sheet against the Petitioner under Sections 420, 506 and 294 IPC. As a result, G.R. Case No.608 of 2003 was registered.

6. The case of OSFC was that the Petitioner applied for leave on 4th and 5th November, 2003 and left the headquarters at Jeypore with permission from 1st to 5th November, 2003 since the 2nd November was a Sunday and 3rd November was a local holiday. On 6th November, the Petitioner extended his leave up to 7th November by telegram on the ground of some urgent work. He again applied to extend his leave up to 30th November on the ground of illness. However, he joined the Jeypore Branch on 27th November, 2003.

7. In the meanwhile, on receiving Umakanta Pati's written complaint, the OSFC enquired into the matter and placed the Petitioner under suspension with effect from 4th November, 2003. However, this was communicated to the Petitioner only on 6th October, 2004. It is explained that the suspension order was passed only after the OSFC subsequently came to know about the arrest and release of the Petitioner on bail in the aforementioned criminal case. The actual suspension took place between 6th November, 2004 to 16th May, 2005 during which the Petitioner was paid subsistence allowance @ 50% of the last salary drawn under Regulation 44(3)(a) of the OSFC Regulations. The Petitioner was reinstated in duty by an order dated 17th May, 2005. On 15th October, 2005 OSFC accepted the Petitioner's application for voluntary retirement from service (VRS) and discharged him on 15th October, 2005. On 12th January 2006, OSFC released a sum of around Rs. 5.5 lakhs towards terminal benefits of the Petitioner under VRS.

8. On realising that a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs had been deducted from his dues by trea