Dalchand Paliwal vs State of Rajasthan and Others

Prakash Tatia, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

Short point involved in this writ petition is that petitioner was suspended due to some criminal case pending against him wherein he was convicted and ultimately he was acquitted. The petitioner has already been reinstated in service with all consequential benefits, yet the respondents have recovered the amount of subsistence allowance which was paid of the period of suspension.

In view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court delivered in the case of Shyam Sunder Mal v. Rajasthan High Court, reported in 2000 (4) WLC (Raj.) 4, the suspended employee is entitled to subsistence allowance and as per Rule 53 and 54 of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951, the subsistence allowance paid to the employee cannot be withdrawn or recovered.

In view of the above Division Bench judgment, this writ petition is allowed and the order of recovery of the amount of Rs. 7426/- paid to the petitioner as subsistence allowance is set aside and the respondents are directed to pay said amount to the petitioner within a period of one month from today. For other relief of the petitioner be treated on duty from 06.01.1984 to 03.07.1992, the issue is covered by decision of this Court delivered in the case of Krishan Murari Sharma v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 1998 (1) WLC (Raj.) 421. Therefore, it is directed that petitioner be treated to be on duty for the period for which he remained under suspension.