IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.742 of 2011 Date of decision : 17.1.2011 Ishwar Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr.Puneet Bali, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. This is a petition in which the petitioner makes a prayer that the period that he has spent under suspension while facing the criminal prosecution, upon his acquittal be treated as the period spent on duty and that by taking into consideration such period he should be promoted with effect from the date when his juniors have been promoted. The petitioner has now been issued a charge-sheet after having earned his acquittal before a court jurisdictionally empowered to try him. Another prayer which has been made in the petition is that the charge-sheet issued against him be quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioner while agitating the grievance of the petitioner has contended that even though there is no bar for the department to undertake departmental proceedings against the petitioner who has faced and earned acquittal in criminal case, yet C.W.P.No.742 of 2011 -2- if the charges are verbatim the same as were there in the FIR, then the issuance of such a charge-sheet cannot be termed to be bona fide and, therefore, the same be quashed and other consequential reliefs which he is entitled to regarding his suspension and period being treated as period on duty be considered. He has placed reliance on the observations of the Supreme Court in Union of India and others v. Naman Singh Shekhawat, (2008) 4 Supreme Court Cases 1. wherein in para 29 and 31it has been held as under :- “29. There cannot be any doubt whatsoever, as has been submitted by the learned Additional Solicitor General, that initiation of departmental proceeding is permissible even after the judgment of acquittal is recorded by the criminal court. But the same would not mean that a proceeding would be initiated only because it is lawful to do so. A departmental proceeding could be initiated if the Department intended to adduce an evidence which is in its power and possession to prove the charges against the delinquent officer. Such a proceeding must be initiated bona fide. The action of the authority even in this behalf must be reasonable and unfair 30. ..... 31. In Ajit Kumar Nag v. Indian Oil Corpn.Ltd. this Court opined that acquittal of a delinquent by a criminal court would not preclude an employer from taking action by the disciplinary authority, if it is otherwise permissible. Such a departmental proceeding, however, cannot be C.W.P.No.742 of 2011 -3- initiated mala fide. It must be conducted in accordance with law. An acquittal of a delinquent ipso facto may not absolve him from undergoing disciplinary inquiry. However, where the charges are absolutely identical, ordinarily the same would not be taken resorted (sic resort) to.” After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I do not deem it a fit case to exercise my jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. There is no denial to the fact that the petitioner can be proceeded against departmentally as on today a charge-sheet has been issued to him which may on a first glance seems to be cloned allegations of the criminal proceedings against him but this Court would not go into this question when the proceedings are yet at the threshold and also when the petitioner faces allegations where his morality is seriously under cloud. No ground to interfere. Dismissed. It is always expected that the proceedings against a delinquent employee shall be concluded expeditiously. 17.1.2011 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss