IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.15577 of 2010 1. KHELARI PASWAN S/O LATE CHHOTELAL PASWAN R/O VILL MUSHARNIA, P.O.BARIARPUR, P.S.SALKHUA, DISTT-SAHARSA, IN- CHARGE HEADMASTER (ASSISTANT TEACHER ), MIDDLE SCHOOL, SAHURIA EAST, ANCHAL-SAUR BAZAR, DISTT-SAHARSA------------- ------------------------------PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 2. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA 3. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE SAHARSA 4. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION SAHARSA-------- ---------------------------RESPONDENTS ----------- 2 2.5.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner was an assistant teacher. A criminal case was instituted against him which was Complaint Case No. 158 C of 2003. The offence for which the petitioner was charged was under sections 498A and 406, 496/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with sections ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.. After rejection of bail application of the petitioner he was taken into custody on 11.8.2004 and the respondent authority learnt about such a development and he was suspended in exercise of power under rule 96 of the Bihar Service Code as would be evident from annexure-1. Petitioner was released on bail from judicial custody on 19.5.2006 and his suspension was revoked which is vide order dated 18.7.2006, annexure-2. There is no dispute that the petitioner came to be finally exonerated by the trial court but he is aggrieved by a decision taken by the District Superintendent of Education, Saharsa which is annexure-3 to the writ application. By this order the period from 11.4.2004 to 18.5.2006 i.e. the - 2 - period under judicial custody has been treated to be on leave without pay. Petitioner has filed the writ application for direction upon the respondents to pay him salary for the period 11,.8.2004 to 18.5.2006. Petitioner has not been able to produce any decision on the subject to show that he has right for payment of salary for the period he was in judicial custody merely because he was subsequently exonerated. Hon’ble Supreme Court has held it in so many decisions that no employee has a right to claim salary for the period he was in judicial custody because of subsequent exoneration which may prove his innocence. It will not bestow him the right to claim salary when he was in judicial custody and not working. The decision in law stands good till date. To that extent the respondents authority have only helped the petitioner by treating that period to be extraordinary leave without salary only to avoid any breakage in service which would have been reflected in his service career and it would have had a disastrous consequence for his post retirement. In view of above neither annexure-3 suffers from any infirmity nor the petitioner has right to claim salary for the period he was in judicial custody and this fact is not in dispute. This writ application has no merit and it is dismissed. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)