As per case facts, the Petitioner was dismissed from service due to a criminal conviction and later acquitted on appeal. He retired during this period and sought back-wages, which was ... denied. His initial Writ Petition challenging this denial was dismissed. He then filed this Review Petition, arguing that his case should be governed by Rule 54 of the Fundamental Rules, entitling him to back-wages upon exoneration, rather than Rule 54-B which pertains to suspension. The question arose whether an employee dismissed due to criminal conviction, subsequently acquitted on appeal, is automatically entitled to back-wages for the period out of service, especially when the dismissal wasn't from disciplinary proceedings and the employee retired. Finally, the Court, relying on established precedents, ruled that acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically grant a right to back-wages. The employer's actions based on a valid conviction cannot be deemed illegal simply because the conviction was later overturned. Since the Petitioner's absence from duty was due to his own involvement in a crime, he is not entitled to back-wages. The Review Petition was dismissed.