Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
HEMANT GUPTA, J.
Nandjee Mehta – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms and Others – Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 6474 of 2014
Decided On : 08-09-2016
Vs.
The State of Bihar & Ors. : Respondents
Service Law–forfeiture of entire pension for life including all other retiral dues–petitioner alleged to have accepted a bribe of Rs. 3500/- and proceeded departmentally–a seprate proceeding under Prevention of Corruption Act is also going on–forfeiture of retiral benefits and that too for life is highly dispropertionate to the misconduct proved–it is harsh and unreasonable and accordingly set aside–Collector, Bhojpur, Ara given liberty to pass fresh order of punishment–Writ application allowed. (Paras 3 & 4)
HEMANT GUPTA, J.
1. The challenge in the present writ application is to an order dated 25th of January, 2014 whereby the entire pension has been ordered to be forfeited for life including the amount of gratuity, earned leave, subsistence allowance during the period of suspension and other retiral due.
2. A perusal of the order shows that the petitioner is facing a trial for the offences under Sections 7, 13(2) read with Section 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for accepting illegal gratification of Rs.3,500/-. In a separate departmental enquiry on similar allegation, the enquiry officer found the petitioner guilty. The disciplinary authority passed an order forfeiting the entire pension for life, including the amount of gratuity, earned leave, subsistence allowance during the period of suspension and other amount due.
3. I find that the forfeiture of retiral benefits such as leave encashment, gratuity, entire pension and that too for life is highly disproportionate to the misconduct proved. The forfeiture of all the retiral benefits, which are result of past service rendered by the petitioner, should not be ordered to be withheld on account of misconduct. The punishment imposed is highly disproportionate to the misconduct proved.
4. I find that the punishment imposed is harsh and unreasonable, therefore, the punishment is set aside with liberty to the Collector, Bhojpur, Ara to pass a fresh order of punishment after considering the gravity of charges, but keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has rendered substantial service to the State and the fact that the pension and the retiral benefits is not bounty but result of service rendered for the State. The Collector shall pass a necessary order within three months from the date a copy of the order is supplied to him.
With the said observation and direction, the writ application stands allowed.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
