THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO.1904 of 2006 O R D E R: This Writ Petition is filed by a former Work Inspector of the Andhra Pradesh Housing Board seeking directions for payment of the differential amount between the subsistence allowance paid and his normal wages for the period between 25.09.2003 to 31.03.2005. The writ petitioner while working as Work Inspector Grade-III was placed under suspension from service on 21.09.2003 as he has been arrested by the local police and was detained in judicial custody from 21.09.2003 onwards pending investigation into Crime No.147 of 2003. After investigation into the said crime, charge was laid against the petitioner for an offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC in C.C.No.568 of 2003. The II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore, by his order dated 02.03.2005 acquitted the writ petitioner of the charge laid against him as P.W.1 has not supported the case of the prosecution. Thereafter, the writ petitioner has been reinstated into service with effect from 11.04.2005. It will be also appropriate to notice that the service of the writ petitioner has been disengaged in April 2005 itself. He was paid initially a sum of Rs.48,627/- representing the retrenchment compensation but however, subsequently, there was some reconsideration and a special package has been awarded for such retrenched employees by the Housing Board. Accordingly, the writ petitioner has received a sum of Rs.2,46,355/- being the compensation for his retrenchment on 31.08.2005. Thereafter, this present writ petition came to be instituted. It is noteworthy that the services of the petitioner have been retrenched by the Housing Board in April 2005 and he has received a special package of compensation amount as noticed supra and thus brought about a permanent end to the relationship of master and servant between himself and the respondent-Corporation. In that view of the matter, the present writ petition, which came to be instituted subsequent thereto seeks to agitate a subsisting grievance prior to the retrenchment of the writ petitioner. By virtue of his detention pursuant to a criminal case lodged against him, the writ petitioner came to be kept under suspension with effect from 21.09.2003. He was promptly reinstated upon the criminal court acquitting him of the charge laid against. Therefore, the employer on his own has not done anything which disentitled the petitioner to render the services to the corporation but because of his detention pursuant to a criminal case, the writ petitioner himself has contributed for his absence from duty. Therefore, how far the employer can be saddled with the responsibility for payment of the differential amount between the subsistence allowance paid and the normal wages he would have earned by rendering service to the employer. Further, when once he has accepted a special package as a measure of compensation for consenting for his retrenchment, it can be safely inferred that he has accepted the said compensation towards full and final settlement of all his entitlements with the employer and therefore, I do not see any reason much less justifiable one to entertain this writ petition, which is instituted thereafter. Only for that reason, I dismiss this writ petition, but however, without costs. --------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J 27th January 2011 bud