Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.
Lal Bahadur Shah - Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh - Respondent
WPS/4612 OF 2024
Decided On : 14-02-2025
(A) Chhattisgarh Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes & Other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Certification) Act, 2013 - Right to pension as a constitutional right - The petitioner, an Executive Engineer, sought release of retiral dues including pension and gratuity, which were withheld due to a disputed caste certificate. The court emphasized that withholding pension without proper justification violates constitutional rights under Article 14 and Article 300-A. (Paras 11, 12, 21, 25)
(B) Pensionary benefits - The right to receive pension is recognized as a property right and cannot be denied without authority of law. The court reiterated that the mere pendency of a caste verification does not justify withholding of retiral benefits. (Paras 11, 12, 22)
(C) Procedural fairness - The court highlighted the necessity of fair hearing in caste certificate disputes, asserting that the burden of proof lies with the authorities to disprove the validity of the certificate. (Paras 23, 24)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, superannuated on 31.03.2024, claimed his retiral dues which were withheld due to a cancelled caste certificate. He argued that there was no pending inquiry against him at the time of retirement.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the withholding of dues was unjustified and directed the release of all post-retirement benefits.
Issues: The main issues included the legality of withholding retiral dues based on a disputed caste certificate and the right to pension.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that pension is a constitutional right and cannot be withheld without proper justification, emphasizing the need for procedural fairness in caste verification processes.
Result: Writ petition allowed; respondents directed to release all retiral benefits within two months.
Order :
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.)
1. Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioner.Also heard Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State/respondents No.1 and 2 as well as Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.3.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the acts of respondent authorities, by which they have not released the retiral dues of the petitioner i.e. Pension, Gratuity, G.P.F., Leave encashment, Family Benefit Scheme/GIS etc.
3. By filing the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):-
“10.1 This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents authority to immediately release the all the retiral dues ie. Pension, Gratuity, G.P.F., GIS, Leave encashment, etc to the petitioner which he is legally entitled on date of his superannuation and also quash the order of withholding of retiral dues of the petitioner, if any, passed by the respondent authority.
10.2 Further hold that the petitioner is entitles for the interest on the retiral dues from the date it fell due till realization at the rate of 18% per anmum.
10.3 Any other relief as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.”
4. Brief facts of the case, are that, the petitioner has been superannuated from service w.e.f. 31.03.2024 while he was working as Executive Engineer (E/M), Water Resources Department, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt.-Raipur (C.G.). The petitioner belongs to 'Gond' caste which falls under the Scheduled Tribe Category in the State of Madhya Pradesh as well as in the State of Chhattisgarh and he did his entire education in the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh i.e. Bhilai and Raigarh, which comes under territorial jurisdiction of State of Chhattisgarh. In the year 1983, the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh through Chief Engineer (E/M), WRD, Bhopal had issued an advertisement to the post of Sub Engineer, to which the petitioner had applied and participated in the said selection process and also submitted all the required documents with caste certificate. After scrutiny of all the documents submitted by the petitioner, he was allowed to participate in the said selection process. On the basis of merit, the petitioner was selected for appointment to the post of Sub Engineer in Water Resources Department and again, after verification of all the documents vide order dated 07.04.1984, the petitioner has been appointed to the post of Sub Engineer. In pursuance of the said appointment order, vide order dated 20.04.1984 the authority has issued the posting order of the petitioner, by which he was posted at Ambikapur to the office of Sub Divisional Officer. Accordingly, petitioner joined on the said post on 01.05.1984. At that time, when there was a bifurcation of staff between Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, the petitioner was working on the post of Sub-Engineer in the office of the Sub- Divisional Officer (E/M), Field Operation and Maintenance Division, Shahdol, District Shahdol (M.P.), by virtue of the final allocation, the petitioner was allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh vide order dated 30.11.2002. Thereafter, the petitioner has been promoted in the year 2003 to the post of Assistant Engineer vide order dated 01.10.2003. In due course of time, the petitioner received periodical promotions and reached to the post of Executive Engineer (E/M), Office of Engineer-in-Chief, Water Resources Department, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt.- Raipur (C.G. vide order dated 17.08.2010. The petitioner has already completed his service tenure of about more than 39 years as on date of his retirement and while working in the State of Chhattisgarh. The caste certificate of the petitioner was subjected to enquiry before High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee. The High Level Caste Scrutiny Committee without following the due procedure prescribed under the Chhattisgarh Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes & other Backward Classes (Regulation of Social Certification) Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 2
Pension is a constitutional right and cannot be withheld without proper justification, even if a caste certificate is disputed.
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....
Pensionary benefits cannot be withheld without statutory adjudication during service; employees are entitled to benefits unless properly invalidated by law.
The railway administration cannot withhold pensionary benefits in the absence of any pending judicial or departmental proceedings against the employee, as per Rule 9 of the Railway Services (Pension)....
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
