440 C CWP No15670 of 2010 e 1 1 91 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HARY AT CHANDIGARH CWP No15670 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION December 072011 Paramjit Singh Petitioner versus 1 Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd and others 0 e e iespondents 0 CORAM HONBLE IS JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY I C5 I Present MrMalkiat singh Advocate for the petitioner MrRajesh Kumar Sharma Advocate for the Z respondents C DAYA CHAUDHARYJ I C0 Z This is a petition filed by an aggrieved OO employee against the action of the respondents 7 Z whereby his claim for grant of pay and allowances for Qm the period 1752007 to 30102007 has been rejected In view of the short controversy before me the relevant facts can be very briefly stated An FIR No267 dated 8102000 for offences under Sections 325323148149 IPC was registered at Police Station Barnala against the petitioner and other persons for inflicting injuries to Surjit Singh Ajmer Singh and his wife Lal Singh and Sukhdev Singh The petitioner and other co accused were convicted by the trial Court on 18122006 In Rashmi 2014.05.24 12: 09 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 441 le CWP No15670 of 2010 2 a the appeal they were acquitted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide judgment dated 692007 He was dismissed from service On being his acquittal he moved representation before the authorities for his reinstatement ln servlC e Considering his prayer made ln the representation he m was reinstated lIl servlce vide order dated 30102007 No order with regard to pay and 0 U allowances for the period he remained out of service I C5 was paSSecl Numerous representations made to the I authorities did not give any fruitful result Z However the authority passed the order dated 262008 regularising the period from the date of I dismissal till the date of reinstatement withoutany Z pay 1 allowance and arrears but with continuity of servlce Aggrieved by the said order dated QO 262008 the petitioner filed an appeal before the 7 Z EngineerinChief However the appellate authority ll rejected the claim of the petitioner vide order dated 142008 and upheld the order dated 2632008 Aggrieved by the orders dated 2632008 and 142008 the petitioner has approached this Court through the present petition Learned counsel for the petitioner sits that once the petitioner has been acquitted of the charges and was also given the benefit of continuity of service then he is entitled for pay and other 1 1X4 Rashmi 2014.05.24 12: 09 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 442 1 CWP No15670 of 2010 3 pr benefits for the period he remained ut of service although the dismissal of the petitioner was bad in la On the basis of aforesaid argunent learned counsel for the petitioner submits that ln the light of reinstatement with continuity ln servlC the respondentCorporation 1S to pay all the 1 consequential benefits In support of his arguments t learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the 0 0 judgment rendered ln Subhash Chander ve State of I 5 Puniab and others 2007 RSJ 606 I On the other hand learned counsel for the Z respondents contested the claim of the petitioner on the ground that lIl the case of the petitioner I principle of no work no pay is applicable In Z support of his contention reliance has been placed on the judgments rendered ln Union of India and QO others ve Jaipal Sirmh 20041 1 SCC 121 and Ranchh 7 Z Chaturii Thakore ve Superintendent Enqineera Gljarat Electricity Board Himmtnaqar 401jaratl and another 19961 11 Supreme Court Cases 603 It is not ln dispute that the offences for which the petitioner was charge sheeted do not involve moral turpitude The petitioner alongwith co accused was convicted by the trial Court vide judgmentdated 18122006 The petitioner and other CO accused have been acquitted by the Additional Sesslons Judge Barnala vide its judgment dated Rashmi 2014.05.24 12: 09 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 443 CWP No15670 of 2010 e 4 62007 vide order dated 1552007 his services 1 were terminated by the authorities However the petitioner was allowed to continue on the job lIl spite of the criminal proceedings and after a gap of about seven years his services were terminated That being the position the servlces of the petitioner 1 were wrongly terminated More SO when the petltloner was reinstated in service with continuity 0 1 0 lIl that event he 1S entitled to all the I t5 consequential benefits The principle of 1 work no I no pay is not applicable lIl the present case because Z the petitioner has never refused to work with the department rather the department itself has I illegally dismissed the servlces of the petitioner 0 and restrained from discharging the duties The case Z of the petitioner 1S squarely covered by the judgment r rendered by this Court ln Subhash Chanders case 3 Z tsupral The judgments relied upon by learned counsel Qu for the respondents are not applicable to the facts of the present case because in the judgments rendered lIl Ranchhodj Charurji ThakoreI s case supral and Jaipal Singhl s case supral the Apex Court held that where an employee disabled himself from rendering the servlce on account of conviction then he is not entitled to back wages whereas 1Il the present case the petitioner has been restrained from service by Rashmi 2014.05.24 12: 09 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 444 CWP No15670 of 2010 15 the department itself and therefore the petitioner 1S entitled to the benefits as claimed In view of the aforesaid discussion the present petition 1S allowed The orders dated 26 3 2008 and 14 9 2008 Annexures P 2 and PA are hereby quashed The respondents are directed to m release all the monetary benefits to the petitioner r 0 0 I t5 December 072011 DAYA CHAUDHARYI JUDGE 0 e I 2Y 1 3 Z 0 Rashmi 2014.05.24 12: 09 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document