Santosh Kumar Sharma vs The State Of Mp
2021 Latest Caselaw 2996 MP

                            1
              HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                            WP.No.16859/2019
  (Santosh Kumar Sharma Vs. M.P.M.K.V.V. Co. Ltd. through its
                        M.D. Gwalior & Others)

Gwalior, Dated : 06.07.2021

      Shri C.P.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

      Shri Anil Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents.

Heard through Video Conferencing.

The present petition is being filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:-

"The humble petitioner prays before this Hon'ble Court that the instant petition of the petitioner may kindly be allowed and the respondents-authorities may kindly be commanded to pay full salary (arrears of the pay) of the intervening period i.e. 31.12.2014 to 10.10.2018 and may also kindly be directed to pay interest @ 15% per annum on the arrears till it's realization, in the interest of justice."

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner is the local resident of District Datia and presently posted at

the post of Line Helper at Devrikalan, Vitran Kendra, Dabra Division

Gwalior. The petitioner was appointed at the post of Karya Bharit

Paricharak Class-2 Line by the order dated 21.10.1997 and since then

the petitioner is working in the Madhya Pradesh Vidhyut Mandal now

is known as Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidhyut Vitran

Company Limitated (M.P.M.K.V.V.Co.Ltd.). The Lokayukta Gwalior

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP.No.16859/2019 (Santosh Kumar Sharma Vs. M.P.M.K.V.V. Co. Ltd. through its M.D. Gwalior & Others)

has registered a criminal case at Crime No.217/2013 in which the

petitioner was charged under Sections 7 and 9 of the prevention of

Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) and the co-accused Rameshwar Dayal

Chandil, who was posted as Junior Engineer Bhitarwar Division, was

charged with Section 13 (1) (d) alongwith 13 (2) of the PC Act, 1988.

After the registration of F.I.R., the petitioner's service was suspended

by the order [email protected]@862&863 dated 13.12.2014 and the petitioner

was attached to Datia Division, for the suspension period. During the

suspension period, the petitioner was allowed to receive 50% of basic

salary as a subsistence allowance only. Lokayukta Police filed a

charge sheet in that F.I.R. before the learned Special Judge (PC Act)

and Ist A.D.J. Gwalior and the case was registered as Special Trial

No.14/2014. After recording the statement of prosecution, learned

trial Court vide judgment dated 31.08.2018 acquitted both the

accused i.e. petitioner and Rameshwar Dayal Chandil. After the

acquittal from the trial Court, the petitioner's suspension was

withdrawn and the petitioner is posted on the post of Line Helper at

Devrikalan, Vitran Kendra, Dabra Divison (Annexure P/1). Vide

order dated 10.10.2018 (Annexure P/1), suspension period of the

petitioner was treated as service period but by that order only

subsistence allowance of the suspension period was provided to the

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP.No.16859/2019 (Santosh Kumar Sharma Vs. M.P.M.K.V.V. Co. Ltd. through its M.D. Gwalior & Others)

petitioner. The petitioner has given representation to the respondent

No.2 for providing the whole salary of the suspension period on dated

31.10.2018, 01.11.2018 and 04.06.2019 but no action has been taken

by the respondents. Despite several representations, the respondents

are not providing the whole salary of the suspension period, which

after the acquittal is the fundamental right of the petitioner. The

petitioner was suspended due to filing of charge sheet against him

before the trial Court and on the same charge sheet, Rameshwar

Dayal Chandil was also charge sheeted and due to which, his services

was also suspended. After the acquittal from the learned trial Court

vide Annexure P-2, Rameshwar Dayal Chandil's service was resumed

vide letter dated 01.10.2018 and by that order he was allotted salary

alongwith the subsistence allowance of suspended period but in case

of the petitioner, no such order has been passed by the respondents

and the act of the respondents is based on pick and choose matter

which is hostile discrepancy. The petitioner has been acquitted by the

trial Court from the charges, due to which, his service was suspended

and after the acquittal, his service was resumed, therefore, the

petitioner is eligible for the whole salary alongwith the subsistence

allowance for the suspension period up to the resuming of service i.e.

from period of 31.12.2014 up to 10.10.2018 and also eligible for the

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP.No.16859/2019 (Santosh Kumar Sharma Vs. M.P.M.K.V.V. Co. Ltd. through its M.D. Gwalior & Others)

interest on the arrears of the salary. A payment of full salary of the

intervening period caused serious prejudice and affects his

fundamental right provided under Articles 14 and 16 of the

Constitution of India, therefore, the respondents may be commanded

to pay full salary (arrears of the pay) alongwith interest at the rate

15% per annum.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted

that if fresh representation is submitted by the petitioner to the

concerning authorities, they will consider the grievances of the

petitioner and settle the dispute.

Considering the fact that the benefit has been extended to the

similarly situated employee, this Courts deems it appropriate to

dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to file

fresh representation to the concerning authorities within a period of

ten working days and in turn if such a representation is filed, the

concerning authorities are directed to consider the representation and

decide the same in accordance with law within a period of three

months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order and

communicate the outcome to the petitioner within the same period.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

Needless to say that this Court has not commented upon the

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH WP.No.16859/2019 (Santosh Kumar Sharma Vs. M.P.M.K.V.V. Co. Ltd. through its M.D. Gwalior & Others)

merits of the case.

E-copy of this order be provided to the petitioner and it is made

clear that E-copy of this order shall be treated as certified copy for

practical purposes in respect of this order.

                                                           (Vishal Mishra)
AK/-                                                           Judge
       ANAND KUMAR
       2021.07.08
       12:55:26 +05'30'