IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. (T) No. 15406 of 2008. Decided on: 6th July, 2011. _____________________________________________________ Roshan Lal. …Petitioner. -Versus- Secretary, H.P. State Electricity Board and others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. P.P. Chauhan, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 and 2. : Mr. Trilok Jamwal, Advocate. For respondents No. 3 and 4. : Mr. Rakesh Sharma, Advocate vice Mr. Anil Chauhan, Advocate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Mr. P.P. Chauhan, learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his reliefs only to non payment of T.A. for the month of September, 2006 and non payment of salary for the month of June, 2007. 2. As far as the question of non payment of T.A. is concerned, it has come in the reply that the petitioner has failed to re-submit the T.A. bill for the month of September, 2006 as per billing cycle register. Consequently, there shall be a direction to the petitioner to re-submit the T.A. Bill for the month of September, 2006 as per billing cycle register within a period of three weeks from today. Thereafter, the same shall be released to him in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. - 2 - 3. Now, as far as the question of withholding of salary for the month of June, 2007 is concerned, Mr. Trilok Jamwal, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 submits that the same has been withheld due to alleged misconduct of the petitioner. However, there is no contemporaneous material placed on record by the respondent-Board to establish whether any show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner or the disciplinary proceedings were ever initiated against him before the decision was taken to withhold the same. Moreover, salary is a property within the meaning of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and it cannot be withheld, except in accordance with law. Accordingly, the respondent-Board is also directed to release the salary of the petitioner for the month of June, 2007 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. 4. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the petition stands disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge July 06, 2011. (bhupender) - 3 - `