Surat Singh Rawat vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 1504 UK

      HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                 Writ Petition (S/S) No. 2673 of 2015

Surat Singh Rawat                                ........... Petitioner

                                    Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and others                      ........... Respondents


Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Subhang Dobhal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sachin Mohan Singh Mehta, Brief Holder for the State/respondents.




                               JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

In the instant writ petition, petitioner challenged the order of dismissal with the consequential relief that his services may be reinstated.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in a trial under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, the petitioner was acquitted and co-accused was convicted. The co-accused preferred an appeal against his conviction in this High Court. The State also preferred an appeal against the acquittal of the petitioner. This Court upheld the conviction of co-accused, but allowed the State appeal and convicted the petitioner also for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Both petitioner and co-accused preferred appeal in the Supreme Court. It is, thereafter, the petitioner was dismissed from service on 13.03.2013. It is submitted that the co- accused also moved an application for his reinstatement, which has been allowed. Subsequent to it now, the petitioner has also been reinstated in his service vide order dated 14.03.2018. It is stated that at this stage nothing survives.

4. Learned senior counsel also submits that the order reinstating the petitioner also stipulates that in case, the conviction of the petitioner is upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, he shall be deemed to be dismissed from service w.e.f. 13.03.2013, when initially he was dismissed from the service.

5. Learned State Counsel admits the factual aspects as narrated by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. Since, nothing survives at present in the writ petition, hence, it is disposed of accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 12.04.2021 Sanjay