1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3452 of 2010 Sayyad Sadek S/o. Sayyad Farid Petitioner Versus The Divisional Engineer, Rural Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Respondents Mr. G.G. Suryawanshi, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & A.A. SAYED, JJ.. DATE : 28th OCTOBER, 2010. PER COURT : 1] By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order of termination issued by the respondent employer. 2] The petitioner was convicted for an offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC by the trial court and sentenced to suffer R.I. For 3 years. In appeal though the conviction was upheld, the order of sentence was reduced to 3 months. In the revision before this court, the revisional court upheld the order of the appellate court. 3] It appears that on account of conviction in a criminal proceeding, the petitioner came to be terminated. Being aggrieved thereby, the present petition. 4] Shri Suryawanshi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner 2 submits that in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of “ Shankar Das. Vs. Union of India and another” reported in AIR 1985 SC 772, the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated in service. 5] We are afraid, as to how the aforesaid judgment would be applicable to the facts of the present case. In the said case, the learned Magistrate, upon the acceptance of guilt by the employee therein , for a charge of Criminal Breach of Trust, and upon making payment, was held guilty for an offence under Section 409 of IPC. However, the court in the peculiar circumstances, relating the crime or criminal, released the employee giving the benefit of the Probation of Offenders Act. In that background, in view of the provisions of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, the Apex Court,held that a person guilty of an offence and dealt with under the provisions of Section 3 and Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act shall not suffer disqualification attaching a conviction for an offence under such law. 6] The same is not the case here. The petitioner has not been given the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act. The conviction and sentence has been upheld up to this court. In that view of the matter, the aforesaid judgment would not be applicable to the present case. 7] The petition is, therefore, without any merit and hence, the same is dismissed. [A.A. SAYED,J] [B.R. GAVAI,J.] grt/wp