Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harpal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 28 April, 2023
CWP No. 8003 of 2019 (O&M) 1 2023: PHHC:060821
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.8003 of 2019 (O&M)
Date of decision : 28.04.2023
Harpal Singh Petitioner
versus
StateofPunjab&ors, ee Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
REE
Present :- Mr. Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Shivani Sharma, DAG, Punjab.
kee
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)
1 Present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking writ in the
nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider his appointment from
the date of 02.08.1999 i.e. when he was granted Constabulary number and to
assign him appropriate seniority accordingly and further consider him for
promotion.
2. The petitioner who was initially enlisted as SPO on 21.08.1994 was
granted constabulary number 643 and was deputed at 27 Battalian PAP,
Jalandhar Cantt. Owing to the petitioner having been booked in a criminal case,
the petitioner was removed from service vide order dated 01.02.2000 which
finally resulted in order of acquittal vide judgment dated 22.02.2001. In 2008
State of Punjab took policy decision to reinstate SPOs acquitted in the criminal
cases. Petitioner approached this Court by way of CWP No.7049 of 2009
decided on 13.01.2016 wherein the following order was passed :-
"The petitioner challenges the order dated 10.04.2009 (Annexure P-
10), whereby, the request of the petitioner for absorption as Constable was
rejected on account of the fact that there was an FIR registered against him.
POOJA SHARMA
2023.05.01 18:26
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CWP No. 8003 of 2019 (O&M) 2 2023: PHHC:060821
The discharge of the petitioner, who was working as SPO, was on account of
the said fact. A further prayer is sought for reinstatement of the petitioner in
service with all consequential benefits. The petitioner was acquitted in the said
FIR on 22.02.2001 by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh
(Annexure P-3) and accordingly, the petitioner is thus entitled for the benefit
of the policy dated 14.05.2008.
In view of the detailed reasons given in judgment of even date passed in
CWP No. 14975 of 2009, Pawan Kumar (Constable) vs. State of Punjab and
others, the said order is set aside. Accordingly, directions are issued to
respondent no. 3 to consider the case of the petitioner for absorption as a
Constable in view of the instructions dated 14.05.2008 within a period of 3
months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. It is, however,
made clear that the petitioner will not be entitled for any monetary benefits
during the period he remained out of service."
3 In the detailed judgment given in CWP No.14975 of 2009 titled as
Pawan Kumar (Constable) Vs. State of Punjab & ors., decided on 13.01.2016
it was held as under :-
"Accordingly, the present petitions are allowed. The policy dated
11.05.2009 is quashed and so are the resultant orders passed whereby, the
petitioners' services had been terminated on account of being reopened under
the policy. In CWP Nos. 12402 and 23269 of 2011, show cause notices had
been issued, which were stayed initially. Accordingly, the termination orders
are quashed including the show cause notices.
"The petitioners accordingly will be entitled for reinstatement, which
exercise may be done within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of
certified copy of the judgment. However, it is made clear that the petitioners
who remained out of service shall not be entitled for any pay for the period
which they remained out of service on the principle of 'no work no pay' on
account of the fact that the State was acting bona fidely on the strength of the
judicial decisions passed by this Court and by the Apex Court which has now
been differed with. However, the petitioners will be entitled for all other
notional benefits including continuity of service for purposes of seniority and
for pension etc."
4 The petitioner was reinstated in compliance of the aforesaid order
but as SPO.
POOJA SHARMA
2023.05.01 18:26
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CWP No. 8003 of 2019 (O&M) 3 2023: PHHC:060821
5 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the petitioner
has been granted constabulary number vide Annexure P-1 and was rooted to 27
Battalion PAP, Jalandhar Cantt. the petitioner's absorption/appointment shall
relate back to the said date in terms of the orders passed by this Court in CWP
No.7049 of 2009 decided on 13.01.2016 and necessary correction has to be
made out and the consequential benefits though notional would be admissible to
the petitioner.
6 Per contra, learned State counsel is not in a position to controvert
the aforesaid factual situation.
7 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going
through the records of the case, this Court finds that once in the earlier round of
litigation the petitioner has been held entitled for all consequential benefits and
the directions had been issued to respondent No.3 to consider the case for
absorption in view of instructions dated 14.05.2008 the date of absorption of the
petitioner as Constable will definitely relate back to Annexure P-1. For the sake
of repetition I may add here that the petitioner was held entitled for all notional
benefits and was declined only monetary benefits. Claim in the present writ
petition since relates to notional benefits only, the same merits acceptance.
8 Resultantly, present writ petition is allowed. Respondents are
directed to make out necessary correction and award the consequential benefits
to the petitioner in terms of the discussions held hereinabove within a period of
8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
(PANKAJ JAIN )
JUDGE
28.04.2023
Pooja sharma-I Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether Reportable : No
POOJA SHARMA
2023.05.01 18:26
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
