CWJC No. 13790 of 2008. Case: Angad Singh Vs The Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank and Ors.. Patna High Court

Case Number:CWJC No. 13790 of 2008
Party Name:Angad Singh Vs The Bihar State Co-operative Land Development Bank and Ors.
Counsel:For Appellant: Alok Anand and Ritu Shekhar,Adv.and For Respondents: R.P. Choudhary,Adv.
Judges:S.P. Singh, J.
Issue:Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Sections 302, 34
Citation:2015 (2) PLJR 144
Judgement Date:November 05, 2014
Court:Patna High Court


S.P. Singh, J.

  1. In the year 2001, the petitioner was posted as Field Officer in Land Development Bank, Jehanabad. He was taken into custody in Dinara P.S. Case No. 197 of 2001 under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Consequent to his custody, the Regional Office of Bihar State Land Development Bank put the petitioner under suspension vide order dated 19.2.2002 w.e.f. 7.1.2002. The petitioner was ultimately acquitted of the charges vide judgment dated 16.7.2004 in Sessions Trial No. 227 of 2002. Consequent to his acquittal, the Bank vide memo dated 3045 dated 12.8.2004 (Annexure-3) revoked the suspension of the petitioner and permitted him to give his joining at his parent branch in Jehanabad. However, he was denied full salary for the period he was in custody, which is the main grievance in this case. The petitioner continued in service till his superannuation on 28.2.2014. The grievance of the petitioner is that though his suspension was revoked on 12.8.2004 consequent to his acquittal, he is not being paid his full salary for the period 7.1.2002 to 12.8.2004. He submits that though he remained on duty from 12.8.2004 till the date of his superannuation i.e. 28.2.2014, still he has not been paid his salary for the said period.

  2. The petitioner as such prays for the following reliefs: (a) for payment of complete salary for the period he was in incarceration i.e. from 7.1.2002 to 12.8.2004 in view of Rule 99 of Bihar Service Code, and (b) Salary for the period from 12.8.2004 to the date of his superannuation i.e. 28.2.2014. The relief of the petitioner is founded on the ground that once he is acquitted of criminal charge, he would be entitled to payment of full salary of the period he has remained under custody. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance upon Rule 99 of the Bihar Service Code.

  3. In reply, Counsel for the Bank earlier on 28.7.2014 submits that the provision of Bihar Service Code would not be applicable in case of Bank, as it has its own Service Rules. He submits that the service rules do not permit an employee to claim salary for the period of incarceration. Learned counsel further submits that if one is arrested pursuant to a criminal case instituted by a private individual, having no concern with the affairs of the Bank, he has disabled himself from service, thus not entitled to the salary for the said period. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon a decision of Apex Court in the case of Ranchhodji Chaturji Thakore...

To continue reading