Acquittal in a criminal trial does not confer automatic rights to reinstatement for daily wage employees, as their employment lacks vested rights.

JUDGMENT

Jagmohan Bansal, J. (Oral)

The petitioners through the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking setting aside of order dated 23.11.2001 (Annexure P-6) whereby their claim for reinstatement as Special Police Officer has been rejected.

2. The petitioners vide appointment letter dated 27.08.1994 were appointed as Special Police Officers (for short 'SPO'). They were appointed by Deputy Superintendent of Police and their job was track patrolling. On the intervening night of 29/30.10.1997, they were on duty as members of escort party on Howrah Express, Amritsar. A commotion erupted between few passengers and escort party. An FIR No. 64 dated 30.10.1997 under Section 395 of IPC was registered at Police Station, Government Railway Police, Patiala against members of the escort party. The petitioners along with other accused were arrested and thereafter released on bail vide order dated 11.12.1997. The petitioners came to be discharged from service vide orders dated 01.11.1997 (Annexure P-1 and P-2 respectively). They faced criminal trial wherein they came to be acquitted at the stage of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. because trial Court formed an opinion that there was no incriminating evidence to be put up against them. The statement of co-accused namely Kuldeep Singh was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The trial Court after scrutinizing evidence led by both sides and considering their arguments vide judgment dated 03.05.2001 acquitted Kuldeep Singh on the ground of benefit of doubt.

3. The petitioners after their acquittal preferred CWP No. 16180 of 2001 before this Court seeking their reinstatement. The said petition came up for consideration before Division Bench of this Court which vide order dated 11.10.2001 disposed of with a direction to respondents to pass speaking order treating writ petition as representation of the petitioners. The relevant extracts of the prayer clause and order dated 11.10.2001 read as:

Prayer Clause

"Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction especially a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the action of Respondents in striking off the names of petitioners from the Rolls of S.P.Os on the ground that they have been involved in a criminal case and then not re-instating/restoring the petitioners to their original position inspite of the fact that they have honourably been acquitted by a Judicial verdict even though it involves quashing of the discharge orders No. 34679-80/SPO Cell dated 1.11.97 (P-2) and No. 34677-78/SPO CELL dated 1.11.97(P-3) which were prepared by respondents but not served upon the petitioners till date being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, in colourable exercise of authority, in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and in violation of law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court.

It is further prayed that a writ in the nature of Mandamus may be issued directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioners as S.P.Os and also to consider them for appointment as Constables and to issue them constable numbers as they had been duly selected for appointment as Constables but they could not be issued Appointment Letters because of prosecution launched against them in Criminal Court as now they have been acquitted from the criminal charges by judicial verdict (Annexure P-1), as has been done in case of other similarly situated persons after their acquittal.

It is further prayed that an interim direction may be given to the respondents to call back the petitioners on duty forthwith.

It is further prayed that the petitioner may kindly be held entitled to all the consequential benefits in form of pay, fixation of the salary, back wages etc. etc.. with interest.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may issue any other writ, order or direction which it may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case."

Order date