1984 PLP 611 (SCMR)

ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑This petition is directed against the order of the Punjab Services Tribunal dated 7‑8‑1982, dismissing petitioner's appeal.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition, briefly, are that at the relevant time the petitioner was employed as a Junior Clerk/Cashier in the office of Extra Assistant Director, Agriculture, Sheikhupura. A dacoity took place in the office of the said Department on the night between 2nd and 3rd of September, 1973 wherein considerable amount of money was taken away by the dacoits by forcibly breaking open the safe. A case under section 458/380, P. P. C. was registered with the police with respect to the said dacoity and after investigation a challan was submitted in the Court of Magistrate Ist Class, Sheikhupura against the accused persons under the said sections. The petitioner was also included amongst the accused.

3. The prosecution examined as many as 26 witnesses in support of its case. After a protracted trial of the case the learned Magistrate, however, acquitted the accused including the petitioner, by giving them the benefit of doubt, vide judgment dated 17‑7‑1979.

4. The petitioner who was a Government servant had been placed under' suspension soon after the registration of the case and remained under suspen sion till 31‑8‑1979. During the period of suspension he was given 1/2 of his pay as subsistence allowance, as admissible under the rules. After his acquittal he was re‑instated with effect from 1‑9‑1979. He then claimed the remaining 1/2 of his pay for the period of his suspension. He filed a depart mental appeal in this connection, but it was dismissed on 28‑4‑1981. He then approached the Punjab Service Tribunals through an appeal under section 4 of the Punjab Services Tribunals Act, 1974. This, too, was dismissed vide the impugned judgment dated 7‑8‑1982. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner has sought leave to appeal from this Court.

5. We have heard the petitioner's counsel at some length. The contention urged before the Service Tribunal was that under the Civil Servant Rules, after his acquittal from the criminal charge because of which he was suspended from service, the petitioner is entitled to the payment of the balance of his pay for the entire period during which be remained under suspension. We are not inclined to agree with this submission. A reading of rule 7 of the C. S. R. (Vol. 1, Part 1) and the Government letter No. S (R) 1‑13/58/S. O. XIII, dated 10‑1‑1959 read with Finance Department letter No. 954‑S. O. (SR) IV/72, dated 2‑6‑1972, would show that the competent authority is vested with the power to withhold the pay or any other emolu ments, if a civil servant tried on a criminal charge is not acquitted honorably. In the present case, the petitioner has not been honorably acquitted but was acquitted because the case was not proved against him beyond reasonable doubt and he was, therefore, given the benefit of doubt. We are, therefore, of the view that the competent authority was empowered to withhold the balance of petitioner's pay and, as such, his appeal was rightly dismissed b the Punjab Services Tribunal. The present petition is consequently dismissed as being without any merit. M. Z. M. Petition dismissed.