CWP 1404/08 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.1404/2008 Mohan Lal Khakhal Versus State & Ors Date of Order ::: 25/11//08 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Devi S.Choudhary, for petitioner Against petitioner while working as Librarian, FIR-4/2001 was registered for offences U/Ss 148, 452, 302/149, 201, 323, 323/149, IPC and after trial, he was convicted by competent court of jurisdiction for offence U/s 302/149, IPC. It appears that against the conviction, petitioner preferred appeal (Cr.App-1314/02) before Division Bench of this Court and he was acquitted from the charges U/Ss 148,452, 302/149, 201, 323 & 323/149, IPC vide judgment dt.03/07/07 (Ann.2) As a result of conviction recorded against petitioner, in exercise of powers U/r 19 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, he was dismissed from service vide order dt.20/11/02 (Ann.1). However, after passing of the judgment of acquittal in his favour, respondents have re-instated him in service vide order dt.21/08/08 pendente instant petition. Counsel submits that petitioner is CWP 1404/08 //2// entitled for monetary benefits for intervening period during which he remained out of employment consequent upon conviction recorded against him. Suffice it to say that appointing authority in exercise of powers U/r 19 of CCA Rules, dismissed petitioner from service as a consequence of conviction recorded by competent court of jurisdiction and at that point of time, action of the authority was in consonance with scheme of Rules but later on, as a consequence of his acquittal on his appeal against conviction, that certainly makes him entitled for reinstatement in service as done in instant case by respondents vide order dt.21/08/08 but if authority has not committed an error while dismissing incumbent from service based on his conviction into effect, subsequent development does not make him entitled for salary for intervening period on being out of employment, unless it is held that action of respondents in dismissing from service was wholly arbitrary or in violation of scheme of Rules but incumbent would certainly be entitled for his notional fixation of pay besides restoration of seniority and other benefits which may not put him to any prejudice after being reinstated in service vide order dt.21/08/08. Consequently, petitioner shall be entitled for notional fixation of pay, seniority, continuity in service and other benefits flowing consequent upon reinstatement in service vide order dt.21/08/08 but other than actual monetary benefits. With the clarification (supra), the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.2/1404CW08-2511.doc