A Police officer claims he was left out of pocket by more than $100,000 due to a lengthy suspension over unfounded drug allegations.

However, a judge has rejected Clifford Roberts' bid to sue the Commissioner of Police and Attorney General for compensation.

Mr. Roberts was working as a constable in the narcotics unit when he was arrested in May 2002 over allegations of conspiring to import heroin and cocaine. He was suspended from his job and placed on half pay.

He was subsequently charged and placed before the Supreme Court – but in October 2004 the Director of Public Prosecutions dropped the charges against him.

Mr. Roberts took legal action against the Commissioner and Attorney General, and a hearing at the Supreme Court ensued earlier this month.

Outlining the issues in a written judgment, Puisne Judge Geoffrey Bell said Mr. Roberts remained suspended from duty while an investigation into the disciplinary aspect of matters continued.

In May 2007, the Commissioner of Police wrote to Mr. Roberts' attorney advising that the internal inquiry was over. The judge said the consequence of the conclusion of the disciplinary inquiry without any charge against him was that Mr. Roberts was entitled to compensation for pay lost during his suspension.

The judge noted: "Mr. Roberts was compensated in the amount of the difference between his base salary and the sum paid to him during his suspension. However, Mr. Roberts claims that his entitlement goes beyond base salary, to include loss of overtime, and a further loss on the basis that he would have been promoted to sergeant as of January 2005 but for his suspension.

"Finally, Mr. Roberts claims that because the terms of the Discipline Orders were not followed, he was obliged to spend a substantial sum on legal fees, which he seeks to recover."

The judge listed the figure given for this aspect of the claim as $105,503.30, covering both the criminal investigation and the disciplinary inquiry. However, ruling against Mr. Roberts, he said he had no legal entitlement to the overtime he was claiming or to have his legal fees repaid.

Mr. Justice Bell further ruled that although Mr. Roberts passed the exams for promotion from constable to sergeant, he had not completed the process by appearing before a promotions board, so it was not the case that he would have been entitled to promotion but for his suspension.

He ordered him to pay the costs of the Supreme Court action.

Mr. Roberts is currently serving as a constable in the Communications and Operations unit. Neither he, nor his lawyer Richard Horseman, could be reached for comment.