PATNA HIGH COURT
U.P.Singh, J.
Dr.Jyotindra Sahay
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction No. 7970 of 1988 ;
Decided On : APRIL 20, 1990
PENSION - WITHHOLDING OR WITHDRAWING - RULE 43 OF THE BIHAR PENSION RULES, 1950 - APPLICABILITY - CONDITIONS - FINANCE DEPARTMENT RESOLUTION NO. 3014-F., DATED 31ST JULY, 1980 - PARA 7 (KHA) - INTERPRETATION - PENSION GRANTING AUTHORITY HAS NO POWER TO STOP PENSION IF NO DEPARTMENTAL OR JUDICIAL ENQUIRY IS PENDING AGAINST THE PENSIONER ON THE DATE OF RETIREMENT.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a retired Regional Deputy Director of Health Services, claimed payment of full and final pension and gratuity with interest on delayed payments. He had submitted all necessary papers before retirement but received only 90% provisional pension. Despite repeated requests, he did not receive the full amount or gratuity. A year after retirement, he was issued a memo alleging violation of government instructions on appointments within two years of retirement.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no departmental or judicial enquiry was pending against the petitioner on the date of retirement. Therefore, Rule 43 of the Bihar Pension Rules, which allows the Provincial Government to withhold or withdraw pension in cases of serious crime or grave misconduct, was not applicable. The court also relied on Para 7 (kha) of the Finance Department Resolution No. 3014-F., dated 31st July, 1980, which states that the pension granting authority has no power to stop pension if no departmental or judicial enquiry is pending against the pensioner on the date of retirement.
Issues: Whether the Provincial Government had the right to withhold or withdraw the pension or any part of it in the absence of a departmental or judicial enquiry pending against the petitioner on the date of retirement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Provincial Government had no right to withhold or withdraw the pension or any part of it in the absence of a departmental or judicial enquiry pending against the petitioner on the date of retirement. The court relied on Rule 43 of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950, and Para 7 (kha) of the Finance Department Resolution No. 3014-F., dated 31st July, 1980, to arrive at this conclusion.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to pay the full and final pension to the petitioner, including the full amount of the gratuity, with interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the delayed payments, within a period of three months from the date of communication of the order.
U.P.Singh, J.
1. The petitioner, who retired from the Health Services as Regional Deputy Director on the 30th June, 1986, has claimed payment of full and final pension and gratuity with interest on the delayed payments. Before his retirement, the petitioner submitted all his papers on the 28th June, 1986, regarding pension, gratuity and other retirement benefits. On the 25th January, 1988 the office of the Accountant General, Bihar, issued payment order granting 90% provisional pension which is contained in Annexure 1 to this application.
2. The petitioner started his career as Civil Assistant surgeon in the year 1956 and was promoted, as Civil Surgeon is the year 1985. The petitioner retired from the service on the 30th June, 1986, as Regional Deputy Director, Health Services.
3. Repeatedly, the petitioner requested for payment of full and final pension and gratuity in several communications addressed to the respondents, but he received no reply. The admitted fact is that no recovery proceeding was started or is pending against the petitioner under Rule 43 of the Bihar Pension Rules.
4. After one year of the petitioners retirement, the Deputy Secretary (Health) issued a memo in May, 198;, calling upon the petitioner to explain certain charges which were based on a D.O. letter dated the 10th February, 1986, issued by the Commissioner, North Chotanagpur Division. A copy of the chargesheet was also enclosed alleging that the petitioner was guilty of violating the Government instruction prohibiting an officer is make any appointment within two years prior to his retirement.
5. In view of the sole legal question raised by Mr. Saran, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, that, in view of the Resolution of the Finance Department dated 31st July, 1980 the pension greeting authority shall have no power to stop the pension, there is no necessity of considering the validity of the charges, although the same has been explained. It was submitted that the petitioner was competent to make appointments and that the appointments of the two drivers and one sweeper were emergent. These appointments are made on ad hoc basis and only temporary for a period of three mouths, only because of the prevailing emergent situation so that she Ambulance service and the work of the Family Planning at the Sub-Center and the Referral Hospital at Bhoraich Nagar which required a sleeper as well could function properly end smoothly in the interest of the general public, The emergent situation was also highlighted by the local representatives of the public. The persons appointed were duly registered in the Employment; Exchange and their applications were also available in this office of she Civil Surgeon. The petitioner had thus sent a detailed reply to the charges but he received no reply from the Health Department.
6. In support of the contention, the learned coarser for the petitioner referred to and re-laid upon Resolution No. 3014-F., dated the 3ist July, 1980, of the Finance Department, of which para 7 (kha) is important to be notices for the purpose of deciding the question, raised herein. The English translation has been forwarded by the learned Counsel for the petitioner:
If till the date of retirement of a Government servant, any kind of departmental enquiry, criminal case, judicial enquiry, etc. have been started against the Government servant then in that situation the pension granting authority shall have no power to stop the pension in any circumstance whatsoever. It; further provides that Rule 43 of the Bihar Pension Rules is a statutory rule and, therefore, any action in contravention of the name by different department to stop pension by adopting different proceedings as also the necessity of obtaining integrity certificate from the Vigilance Department would stand automatically revoked.
7. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the State relied upon Rule 43 of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 and contended that the Provincial Governme
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.