Judicial findings of misconduct in criminal proceedings can justify the imposition of a penalty on retired employees, overriding delays in departmental proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

PRATEEK JALAN, J.

CM APPL. 50706/2025 (Exemption)

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 12462/2025 & CM APPL. 50705/2025 (interim relief)

1. By way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner assails an office order dated 24.05.2024, by which the respondent No.2 – Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board [“DUSIB”] imposed a “100% cut in provisional pension for life time”, and an appellate order dated 13.09.2024, which affirmed the aforesaid order.

2. The petitioner joined the Jhuggi Jhopri [“JJ”] Department, Delhi Development Authority [“DDA”], as an Enumerator on 08.01.1975. Upon creation of DUSIB in the year 2010, the petitioner’s services were transferred to it. The petitioner retired from DUSIB on 31.05.2010.

3. While the petitioner was in service, a complaint dated 24.01.2001, alleging corruption in the functioning of the Department, was lodged with the Anti-Corruption Department, Civil Lines. Subsequently, on 18.05.2001, FIR No. 29/2001 was registered, in which the petitioner, along with a few others, was named as an accused.

4. After the petitioner’s retirement, the criminal proceedings culminated in a judgment dated 28.02.2017, passed by the Special Judge (PC Act), (ACB), Central-05, whereby the petitioner and others were convicted under Section 13 (1)(d)(ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Section 120B and 420 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860, read with, Sections 511 , 468 and 471 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860. By a consequent order dated 06.03.2017, he was sentenced to four years’ simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.25,000/-.

5. The petitioner was, thereafter, served with a show cause notice dated 22.12.2023, issued by DUSIB, referring to the aforesaid orders of conviction and sentence, and proposing the imposition of penalty under Rule 19 of the Central Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 [“CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965”], read with Rule 9 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 [“ PENSION RULES , 1972”], taking into account the gravity of the criminal charges proved against him. The petitioner was also afforded an opportunity to submit his representation against the proposed penalty.

6. In his representation dated 08.01.2024, the petitioner submitted that he had filed Criminal Appeal No. 523/2017 before this Court, challenging the aforesaid judgment and order on sentence, and relied upon the grounds and contentions raised in that appeal. He further noted that he was already receiving provisional pension from the department. The petitioner contended that Rule 19 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, read with Rule 9 of the CCS Rules, 1972, were not applicable in his case, owing to the pendency of his criminal appeal. He also referred to certain personal circumstances, and submitted that no penalty ought to be imposed upon him.

7. The petitioner was granted a personal hearing by the Disciplinary Authority.

8. By the impugned order dated 24.05.2024, the Disciplinary Authority of DUSIB, taking into account the gravity of the charges established against the petitioner, imposed a “100% cut in pension for life time”. The petitioner’s statutory appeal was dismissed on 13.09.2024, also after granting him personal hearing.

9. It is in these circumstances, that the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

10. I have heard Mr. Rishav Ranjan, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Anuj Chaturvedi, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 – DUSIB.

11. The impugned action has been taken by DUSIB, invoking its powers under Rule 19 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, and Rule 9 of the PENSION RULES , 1972. The relevant extracts of the Rules are as follows:-

(i) Rule 19 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965:

“19. Special procedure in certain cases Notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 14 to Rule 18:

(i) where any penalty is imposed on a Government servant on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction