ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. Abhash, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Respondent/State.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred for quashing the order as contained in Memo No. 816 dated 19.03.2024 passed by Joint Secretary whereby the petitioner has been imposed penalty of deduction of 10% monthly pension for three years under Rule 139 of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules 1950’).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner superannuated from his service as Technical Advisor, Rural Works Department, Circle Bettiah on 31.01.2020. It is next submitted that after retirement 90% provisional pension and 90% provisional gratuity are said to have been sanctioned vide letter no. 3844 dated 21.08.2020 w.e.f. 01.02.2020, pursuant thereto, office of the Accountant General (A & E), Bihar vide PPO No.202011011158PO and GPO No. 202011011158 authorized the provisional pension and provisional gratuity.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Officer On Special Duty, R.W.D vide letter no. 358 dated 08.06.2018 had issued show-cause to the petitioner, while the petitioner was in service for not following the provisions of Bitumen Price Neutralization and the petitioner was directed to submit his explanation within seven days. It is the case of the petitioner that there was no formal enquiry or disciplinary proceeding initiated during his service period rather various show-causes were issued but formal decision to institute departmental enquiry was never taken and even being confronted with such legal question, the State counsel has not produced any material to show that petitioner was ever placed under departmental enquiry by appointing Inquiring Officer, Presenting Officer as per Bihar CCA Rules, 2005, to carry out fact finding enquiry, while the notices continued to be issued, even after his retirement, based on which the impugned decision been taken whereas, owing to pendency of such show-cause notices prior to passing of the impugned order, which is appended with the writ petition as Annexures P/4, P/5 & P/6 being letter no. 2460 dated 10.10.2018, letter no. 348 dated 17.01.2020 and letter no. 1326 dated 10.08.2022 as contained in letter no. 348 dated 17.01.2020, 10% of pension and pensionary benefit is said to have been withheld by the respondents, while no decision on his explanation to show was ever taken for initiation of formal departmental enquiry.

5. It is further case of the petitioner that the Special Secretary, Rural Works Department, Bihar, Patna vide Letter No. 1676 dated 03.08.2023 (Annexure P/7) by invoking the provisions of Rule 139 of ‘the Rules’ without there being any enquiry under Section 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950, which could form basis to make appropriate deduction from pension still issued a show-cause for making reasonable deduction in the pension, of the petitioner. The petitioner is said to have submitted his response dated 25.09.2023 to Special Secretary, R.W.D, Bihar, Patna and after submission of the show-cause, the impugned order as contained in Memo No. 816 dated 19.03.2024 is said to have been passed whereby 10% of monthly pension for three years has been directed to be deducted from the petitioner by invoking the provisions of Rules 139 of ‘the Rules 1950’.

6. It has next been submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that without resorting to any procedures prescribed under ‘the Rules 1950’ for an allegation of any misconduct of the year 2009, which is beyond four years, the authorities were estopped from taking any recourses under Rule 139 of Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 for reduction of pension without any final decision having been taken under 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 and as such, the proceedings so drawn under Rule 139 of the Bihar Pension Rule, vitiates in law in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Bihar & Others v. Mohd. Idris Ansari,  1995 Supp (3)