IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 6176 of 2010 Date of Decision: 6.4.2010 Prithvi Singh ....Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Navin Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. The petitioner through the instant petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 8.10.2009 (Annexure P-1) whereby he has been dismissed from service by respondent No.1. The petitioner was appointed as Junior Engineer by respondent No.2 on 8.7.1981 and was posted as such at Chandigarh. FIR No.3 dated 20.3.1993 was registered against the petitioner and one Bharat Singh, SDO of the department by the Vigilance Department for some embezzlement. In that case, the petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sonepat vide order dated 23.1.2008 and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said order before the Sessions Judge, Sonepat CWP No. 6176 of 2010 -2- who vide his order dated 6.3.2008 modified the sentence awarded by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sonepat, reducing the same till the rising of the court. However, the sentence of fine of Rs.2000/- was maintained. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed a petition bearing CRR No. 1496 of 2009 before this Court and the said petition was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 7.12.2009 (Annexure P-2). Resultantly, the petitioner was dismissed from service by respondent No.1 vide office order dated 8.10.2009 (Annexure P-1). Hence, the present writ petition. It is not in dispute that the petitioner had been convicted for offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code by the trial court and the said conviction was upheld up to the High Court. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is satisfied that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order dated 8.10.2009 (Annexure P-1) dismissing the services of the petitioner which may warrant interference in exercise of its jurisdiction under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India because the petitioner has been dismissed on the ground of his conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed in limine. April 6, 2010 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE