AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 211 wordsJagmohan Bansal, J
The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondents to pay subsistence allowance for the period from 08.05.2002 to 19.03.2007.
The petitioner was enrolled as Constable on 20.11.2001. He was implicated in FIR No.24 dated 22.03.2002, under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC registered at Police Station, Jalandhar Cantt. He was suspended on 08.05.2002. He was reinstated by Deputy Inspector General of Police on 19.03.2007. He was acquitted by Trial Court vide judgment dated 11.11.2009. In the departmental proceedings, he was awarded punishment of forfeiture of one year’s service for increment.
The petitioner claims that he was entitled to subsistence allowance for the period from 08.05.2002 to 19.03.2007.
Learned State counsel expressed his inability to controvert that petitioner was entitled to subsistence allowance for the aforesaid period.
Counsel for the parties are unable to clarify whether subsistence allowance for the said period was actually paid or not.
In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondent to pay subsistence allowance for the aforesaid period within one month from the date petitioner files application along with evidence of non-payment of subsistence allowance.