Judgment

Mr. Harsimran Singh Sethi, J. :-

CM-3293-C-2022

Present application has been filed for placing on record Annexures A-1 to A-8. Application is allowed and Annexures A-1 to A-8 are taken on record.

RSA-1025-2022

1. The present regular second appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree of the trial court by which, the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff was allowed vide judgment and decree dated 20.09.2018 as well as the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court dated 10.11.2021 by which, the appeal filed against the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 20.09.2018, has been dismissed.

2. Certain facts need to be mentioned for the correct appreciation of the controversy in hand.

3. The respondent-plaintiff joined the department as a Lineman on 28.04.1975 and was promoted as a Junior Engineer on 01.01.1997. In the year 2000, an FIR No. 23 dated 09.06.2000 was registered against the respondent-plaintiff under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the respondent-plaintiff was convicted in the said FIR by the Sub Judge, Faridkot on 26.09.2003.

4. Keeping in view the conviction of the respondent-plaintiff under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, exercising the powers under Article 311 of the Constitution of India, the respondent-plaintiff was dismissed from service. The conviction was challenged by the respondent-plaintiff before this Court by filing an appeal, which appeal was admitted and during the pendency of the said criminal appeal, the respondent-plaintiff attained the age of retirement on 31.08.2008. The Criminal Appeal i.e. CRA-S-1865-2003 filed by the respondent-plaintiff was allowed by this Court vide judgment dated 22.07.2015 and the conviction of the respondent-plaintiff was set-aside.

5. Upon being acquitted by the court of the allegations, the respondent-plaintiff filed a civil suit challenging the order of dismissal from service dated 16.01.2004 as well as order dismissing his appeal dated 07.04.2005 on the ground that he was dismissed from service on the basis of the conviction, which basis no longer exists keeping in view the order passed in appeal as he has already been acquitted of the allegation and, therefore, he is entitled for all the service benefits from the date of dismissal.

6. Keeping in view the evidence, which came on record, the trial court held that as the impugned order dated 16.01.2004 was passed on the basis of conviction of respondent-plaintiff, which conviction no longer exists, the order of dismissal as well as the order dismissing the appeal dated 07.04.2005 cannot be sustained and the same were quashed with all consequential benefits including arrears of salary along with interest.

7. Feeling aggrieved against the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 20.09.2018, appeal was preferred, which appeal has also been dismissed by the lower appellate court vide judgment and decree dated 10.11.2021 upholding the judgment and decree of the trial court dated 20.09.2018. Hence, the present regular second appeal.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants-defendants argues that in the present case, all the service benefits for the period respondent-plaintiff remained out of service, have been extended by the courts below on the ground the respondent-plaintiff was acquitted by this Court, whereas as per the settled principle of law, in case a convicted employee is later on acquitted, the said employee is not entitled for the back wages, which settled principle of law has not been considered by the courts below while passing the judgments and decrees, which have been impugned in the present appeal.

9. Learned counsel for the appellants relies upon the judgment in Ranchhodji Chaturji Thakore Vs. Superintendent Engineer, Gujarat , (1996) 11 SCC 603 as well as the judgment in Civil Appeal No. 3339 of 2019 titled as Raj Narain Vs. Union of India and others, decided on 01.04.2019, to contend that the grant of back wages by the courts below even prior to the date when the r