Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 8259 P&H
Judgement Date : 19 April, 2024
2024:PHHC:052677
116
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-8553-2024
Date of Decision: 19.04.2024
GURWINDER SINGH ...Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present:- Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Pawan Kumar, DAG, Punjab.
*****
JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227 of
Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 26.07.2023
(Annexure P-5) whereby period from 11.08.2018 to 09.12.2022 has been
treated as non-duty period.
2. The petitioner in 2018 was posted at Police Station Sadar, Patti
as Head Constable. He along with other police officials came to be
implicated in FIR No.15 dated 10.08.2018 registered under Sections 342,
120-B of IPC and Sections 7, 13(2) PC Act, Vigilance Bureau, Amritsar.
The Vigilance Bureau conducted investigation and found him innocent. No
challan was presented against him. The petitioner and other officials
preferred CWP No.3201-2022 titled as "Gurwinder Singh Vs State of
Punjab & Ors" before this Court which was disposed of vide order dated
26.08.2022 with a direction to respondents to pass fresh order in accordance
authenticity of this order/judgment.
with law. The petitioner came to be reinstated by order dated 26.07.2023,
however, he has not been granted salary and other benefits for the dismissal
period i.e. 11.08.2018 to 09.12.2022.
3. Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate submits that along with petitioner
Preetinder Singh, Inspector was dismissed from service. He has also been
reinstated, however, vide order dated 22.06.2022, the respondent has
reinstated him with back wages and the period of dismissal from service has
been regularized. The petitioner has filed representation dated 06.10.2023
(Annexure P-6) before the authorities and grievance of the petitioner at this
stage would be re-addressed, if respondents are directed to decide his claim
in the light of order dated 22.06.2022(Annexure P-7) passed in the case of
similarly situated official namely Preetinder Singh.
4. Mr. Pawan Kumar, DAG, Punjab who on advance notice is
present in the Court submits that Competent Authority would look into
representation of the petitioner and as per law as well considering case of
similarly situated employees pass an appropriate order.
5. In the wake of statement of learned State counsel, the present
petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondents to decide
representation of the petitioner within three months from today.
(JAGMOHAN BANSAL)
19.04.2024 JUDGE
himanshu
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
authenticity of this order/judgment.
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!