Civil Writ Petition No. 7148 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 7148 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: September 10 , 2010 Ex Constable Suraj Mal .....Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ....Respondents Present: Mr. R.K. Malik, Senior Advocate,with Mr. Kohal Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Sunil Nehra, Sr. DAG, Haryana, for the State. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner was enrolled as a Constable in Police on 10.11.1981. On 2.1.2003, he was convicted for an offence under Section 364 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 7 years coupled with fine of Rs. 1000/-. The petitioner had filed an appeal against the same, which was dismissed on 2.8.2005. On account of his conviction, the petitioner was dismissed from service on 13.11.2006, but this order was made effective w.e.f. 2.8.2005 i.e. the date his appeal against his conviction was dismissed by this Court. Further, the petitioner was also held not entitled to the subsistence allowance, which was already paid to him and the same was directed to be recovered from his GPF/GIS account. The Civil Writ Petition No. 7148 of 2010 -2- petitioner had filed an appeal against the said order on the ground that he could not be dismissed from retrospective date and also that he would be entitled to subsistence allowance, which stood paid to him. Further grievance was that recoveries could not be effected from his GPF amount. The appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed on 6.10.2007. Thereafter, he filed a revision petition against the same order, which was also dismissed on 10.6.2009. The petitioner has, accordingly, filed the present writ petition. Reference is made to the order passed by this Court dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against his conviction . It is stated that the petitioner has been dismissed from service from the date his appeal against his conviction was dismissed. Though it is conceded before this Court that dismissal order was passed on 13.11.2006, but this order was made effective w.e.f. 2.8.2005. The justification in passing the order of dismissal of the petitioner from retrospective date is on the ground that the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed on the said date. Even if it be so, the dismissal could not have been given retrospective effect. The order of dismissal as per the settled position of law has to be effective from the date it is passed and not from any date prior thereto. It was for the Department to pass order after the appeal filed by the petitioner against his conviction was dismissed. The respondents can justifiably plead to dismiss the petitioner on the basis of his conviction, but the said order could not have been passed with effect from retrospective date. To this extent, impugned order cannot be sustained. It is clear that the dismissal otherwise is justified on the Civil Writ Petition No. 7148 of 2010 -3- basis of conviction, but will have to be given effect from the date the order was passed i.e. 13.11.2006. That being the legal position, the respondents were not justified in recovering the subsistence allowance, which was paid to the petitioner between 2.8.2005 to 13.11.2006. The recovery, if any, made from the petitioner, shall be required to be refunded to him. The further grievance is that his GPF amount has not been released. State counsel has submitted that the petitioner has not so far moved any application in this regard. If any application has not been filed by the petitioner, let him to do so within a period of two weeks from today. The GPF amount, thereafter, would be released within one month from today along with the interest accruing thereon. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed in view of the above terms. September 10, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) monika I JUDGE