IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
HARISH KUMAR, J.
Param Hans Kumar Singh Son of Late Surendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6478 of 2018
Decided on : 17-11-2022
Retiral Dues - Withholding of Gratuity and Leave Encashment - Bihar Pension Rules 1950, Rule 43(c) - The court directed the Commissioner Commercial Taxes cum Principal Secretary, Commercial Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, to consider the case of the petitioner afresh for grant of his due retiral benefits, including gratuity and leave encashment in the light of the settled legal position.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a retired government servant, sought direction for the payment of post retiral dues, including gratuity and leave encashment, which were withheld due to a pending criminal case against him. The State contended that the gratuity could be withheld until the conclusion of the criminal case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the withholding of gratuity and leave encashment based on the pending criminal case was unjustified and not sustainable in law.
Issues: The main issue was the withholding of the petitioner's retiral benefits, including gratuity and leave encashment, due to a pending criminal case against him.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provisions of the Bihar Pension Rules 1950, Rule 43(c) did not empower the government to withhold gratuity and leave encashment based on a pending criminal case. The court also emphasized that the amendments to the rules could not be applied retrospectively to deprive the petitioner of his vested rights.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ application and directed the Commissioner to reconsider the petitioner's case for the grant of retiral benefits, including gratuity and leave encashment, in accordance with the settled legal position.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar Sinha No.2, learned counsel for the petitioner duly assisted by learned counsel Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh, Mr. Vivekanand Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent Accountant General and Mr. Hari Shankar Rai, learned Assistant Counsel to Advocate General for the State.
2. The present writ application has been filed seeking direction upon the respondents to ensure payment of post retiral dues, including gratuity, leave encashment with statutory interest and other benefits, which has been withheld by the order issued by the Commissioner Commercial Taxes cum Principal Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, as contained in letter no.6/PE U 14-15/2012, 670, dated 01.03.2013.
3. The short facts in narrow compass is that the petitioner joined the service on 12.09.1984, on the post of Commercial Taxes Officer in the office of Joint Commissioner Commercial Taxes, Patna Division, Patna. After completion of probation, he was posted in Urban Circle Officer, Jamshedpur, on the post of Commercial Taxes Officer. It is further submitted that somehow or other on account of certain allegation, the petitioner was charged in the Fodder Scam bearing Case No. RC63A/96 (Pat). During the pendency of the aforesaid criminal case, the petitioner retired from his service on 31.12.2012 from the office of the Joint Commissioner, Commercial Taxes (Audit) Patna.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after his superannuation, the petitioner has submitted requisite documents before the authority concerned for grant of his retiral benefits, however, the petitioner has been allowed only pension to the extent of 90 per cent and neither amount of the gratuity nor the leave encashment has been bestowed upon him. He further submits that by the order of the Commissioner Commercial Taxes cum Principal Secretary, dated 01.03.2013, the claim of the petitioner was considered and having found that the prosecution has been sanctioned against the petitioner in Fodder Scam, which has not been disposed of till date, the amount of gratuity has been withheld and he has been allowed only 90 per cent of pension in the light of the resolution no.3014 dated 31.07.1980, issued by the Finance Department. He also submits that after the retirement of the petitioner the amount under head of leave encashment was sanctioned, but the same has also not been paid to the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State by referring to the averments made in the counter affidavit submits that in exercise of the power conferred in Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the amendment has taken place in Bihar Pension Rules 1950 by amending Rule 43 (d) which clearly empowers the State Government that “if any departmental or Judicial Proceeding is pending against the government servant at the time of retirement, full amount of gratuity may be with held till the final conclusion of the Departmental or Judicial Proceeding and issuance of order accordingly.
6. He next submits that there is no prayer for quashing of the impugned order dated 01.03.2013 and in absence of such prayer no relief can be granted to the petitioner. He also submits that the criminal case is still subjudice and there is every possibility that the learned Competent Court may pass order of recovery against the petitioner, inasmuch as the petitioner is an accused of “Animal Husbandry Scam” and in such circumstances order passed by the Commissioner Commercial Taxes cum Principal Secretary, Commercial Department, Government of Bihar, has been passed in accordance with law.
7. The issue involved in the present matter has already been set
Arvind Kumar Singh Vs. State of Bihar
Dr. Aquil Ahmad Vs. State of Bihar
The withholding of retiral benefits, including gratuity and leave encashment, based on a pending criminal case, must be in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions and cannot be applied retr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the withholding of retiral benefits, including gratuity and leave encashment, based on the pendency of a criminal case, must be in accordance ....
Gratuity withheld pending departmental proceedings post-retirement under CCS Pension Rules; leave encashment and insurance must be released absent specific legal prohibition.
In the absence of specific provisions empowering the employer to withhold the pension of an employee, the same cannot be withheld, especially after the employee has been acquitted from criminal charg....
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.