Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
AMITENDRA KISHORE PRASAD
Vishnu Kumar Gupta S/o Late Udayram Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Heard Mr. N. Naha Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents No.1 to 3 and Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4.
2. By filing the present petition, the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and prays for issuance of an appropriate writ commanding the respondent authorities to release his retiral/service dues including gratuity, General Insurance Scheme, Leave Encashment and Provident Fund, as he has retired on 30.06.2021. The petitioner has claimed the following reliefs:–
“10.1 Issue an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus and direct the respondents to release the retiral dues including gratuity, GIS, leave encashment and provident fund deposits along with an interest to the tune of 9% per annum.
10.2 Issue an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus and direct the respondents to calculate the retiral dues under all the relevant heads after applying the annual increments on due occasions in light of the order dated 04.02.2017 (Annexure P/3).
10.3 Grant any other relief, which is deemed fit in the circum
Retiral benefits cannot be withheld solely based on pending criminal charges unrelated to an employee’s official duties, as they are vested rights earned through service.
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....
Withholding retiral benefits based solely on the pendency of an FIR is unjustified without a charge-sheet being filed.
Retiral benefits cannot be withheld based solely on the registration of FIRs without a challan being presented at the time of retirement.
Pension and gratuity cannot be withheld due to unrelated criminal proceedings; provisional pension must be granted during appeal.
The mere pendency of an appeal against acquittal does not justify withholding retiral benefits, as established by the court's interpretation of relevant pension rules.
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
