http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: STATE OF U.P. & ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: VED PAL SINGH & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       07/10/1996

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.B. PATTANAIK

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      We have heard learned counsel on both sides.      This  appeal   by  special  leave  arises  against  the judgment of  the High  Court of Allahabad dated 12.8.92 made in W.P.  No.507/83. It  is not necessary to re-count all the events touching  upon the  interference by the High Court in the matter. We issued notice only on the limited questior of payment of  back wages.  The respondent who was on temporary service was  removed from  service on conviction by criminal court. A criminal case had been initiated against him for offence under section 409 I.P.C. No doubts, later, he was acquitted of the charge. The record of the service of the  respondent was  produced before  the  Tribunal.  The Tribunal on  going through  the record  was not  inclined to interfere with  the order. But the High Court had interfered with the  removal of  the respondent  from service, Since we are not  going into  the  question  of  correctness  of  the removal of  the respondent  from service after acquittal, it would suffice  to state  that  from the record placed before us, we  are satisfied that the respondent is not entitled to the back  wages. His  integrity was doubted and he was found to be  man of   doubtful integrity. His confidential reports are not good.      Corruption  is   the  result   of   deep-seated   moral degradation and  unsatiated greed  for wealth. The office of public service  affords an opportunity to the public servant to abuse  of the  office in  that pursuit  to accept illegal gratification for  the discharge  of official duty. Criminal prosecution launched against  the public servant many a time may end  may be  due to   technical  defects inapathy on the part of  the prosecution or approach in consideration of the problem or  the witnesses,  turn hostile  or  other  diverse reasons but  the meet  of the  matter is  that on  equitable consideration the  Government servant  claims  reinstatement into service.  Equity per  se may not prevent the Government to take  appropriate action under the conduct rules or under Article 311  of the  Constitution but  many a  time they  do become fruitless  exercise. Resultantly   public  servant on re- instatement claims consequential benefits including back

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

wages. On many occasion, public servant avoids the detection of corruption  or by  skilful management proof of commission of corruption  would  be  wanting.  But  his  conduct  gains notoriety in service and among public in that behalf  payment of back wages and impetus and a premium on corruption. The  society has  to pay  the price  for corrupt officers from  public exchequer.  Therefore, when  the court directs  payment   of  back   wages  or  reinstatement,  the court/tribunal is  required to  consider the backdrop of the circumstances and  pragmatically apply  the principle to the given set  of facts.  No  abstract  principle  of  universal application Could  be laid  in that behalf. The confidential reports  of   the  officer   prior  to   initiation  of  the prosecution do furnish the evidence of conduct of the public servant. It is the duty of the officer to place his material and of  the Government  to place all the necessary record in that behalf before the court/tribunal for  consideration and it would  be for  the court/tribunal to  consider and decide the matter. This Court has pointed  out in several cases the need  to   record  confidential    reports  objectively  and dispassionately with  a   reformative purpose  to enable the public servant  to reform  himself to improve quality of the service and   efficiency  of the  administration. Parochial, sectorial  or nepotic approach would be deleterious to the efficiency of  administration and  maintenance of discipline in service.  Confidential reports  placed on  record in this case do  disclose such  deleterious  tendency in writing the confidential  reports.   One  set     of  officers  reported integrity of  the appellant  and    while  diametrically  in opposite  terms  the  predecessor  had    reported  doubtful integrity of  the appellant. They do demonstrate the lack of objectivity  on the part of some officers in writing the confidential reports.  This  would  be  very  sad  state  of affairs impinging upon efficiency of administration. We have confined to  the question  of payment  of back wages with an intention that  on reinstatement  the appellant would reform himself purging from the proclivity of corrupt practices and prove himself  to be  a useful public servant to himself, to the  family  and  to  the  society.  In  the  light  of  the confidential reports indicating doubtful integrity we are of the view  that it is not expedient to direct payment of back wages though  he was  acquitted by the criminal court may be on technical grounds or on merits he is not entitled to back wages. As  stated earlier  the circumstances of the case and conduct of the appellant do furnish justification in denying him the  back wages lest it would be a premium on proclivity for corruption.      The appeal  is accordingly allowed. The order directing Payment of back wages stands set aside. No costs.