High Court: Don’t dismiss cops immediately after FIR

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, June 7

In a significant judgment that may change the way police officers facing allegations are proceeded against, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the state of Punjab and its functionaries to avoid dismissing a cop “close on the heels of registration of FIR”.

Full salary if employee exonerated

• The Bench observed a fully exonerated government servant would receive full salary and allowances for the period of dismissal, which would be treated as ‘period spent on duty’
• The Bench clarified that if the government servant was not fully exonerated, the competent authority would determine the amount payable and the period of absence from duty would not be treated as a ‘period spent on duty’

Justice Jagmohan Bansal ruled that the services of a police officer might be placed under suspension as per the Punjab Police Rules. The departmental inquiry in such matters could be deferred, but not dispensed with in a mechanical manner.

“In an appropriate case, the outcome of a criminal case may be awaited. If an officer is straightway dismissed and reinstated on the account of acquittal by a criminal court, it leads to the payment of back wages without work,” he said.

The ruling came on a bunch of seven petitions filed against the state of Punjab and others by Iqbal Singh and other petitioners through senior counsel GS Bal, and advocate Ranjivan Singh among others.

The petitioners, officers with the Punjab Police, were at dismissed from service and reinstated later. But they were neither paid salary nor allowance for the duration between their dismissal and reinstatement. The Bench was told that the phase was not treated as ‘period spent on duty’. They were seeking back wages and counting of period as ‘spent on duty’.

Referring to the Punjab Police Rules, Justice Bansal culled out the legal position governing the payment of salary and allowance during suspension and between dismissal and reinstatement.

The Bench observed a fully exonerated government servant would receive full salary and allowances for the period of dismissal, which would be treated as ‘period spent on duty’.

It clarified if the government servant was not fully exonerated, the competent authority would determine the amount payable after notifying the person of the proposed quantum and considering his representation.

Justice Bansal also observed that the government servant would be treated on a par with an employee who has not been fully exonerated, if the order of dismissal, removal, or compulsory retirement was overturned solely due to non-compliance with Article 311 provisions and no further inquiry was conducted. Besides, the amount of pay and allowances payable cannot be, in any case, less than the subsistence allowance and other admissible allowances.