SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Gau) 416

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
N. Unni Krishnan Nair, J.
RAMENDRA LAL BISWAS S/O- LATE RASTIK LAL BISWAS - Appellant 
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS - Respondent 
WP(C)/2529/2022
Decided On : 04-04-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Advocate for the Petitioner: MS. S SEAL, MS. J CHETTRY,MS. S KANUNGOE
Advocate for the Respondent: SC, FINANCE, GA, ASSAM,SC, AG (A AND E)

The absence of a charge-sheet in pending criminal proceedings allows entitlement to pension and benefits, as departmental proceedings were dropped, exonerating the petitioner.

Headnote:(A) Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964 - Rule 9 - Assam Services (Pension) Rules, 1969 - Rule 21 and Rule 22(1) - Pension entitlement - Petitioner, after being suspended and subsequently reinstated, sought regular pension and benefits post-retirement - Court found no conclusive judicial proceeding against petitioner, thus entitling him to pension - Suspension period regularized as on duty. (Paras 6, 12, 18)

(B) Disciplinary Proceedings - The court emphasized that the dropping of departmental proceedings exonerates the petitioner from charges, allowing for pension benefits. (Paras 7, 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner was suspended due to alleged misconduct, faced a departmental inquiry, and was later reinstated. Upon retirement, he sought regular pension and benefits, which were initially withheld due to pending criminal proceedings. (Paras 3, 12)

Findings of Court:
The court ruled that the petitioner is entitled to regular pension and benefits from the date of superannuation, as no charge-sheet was filed in the criminal case. (Paras 12, 18)

Issues: The main issues were whether the petitioner was entitled to regular pension despite pending criminal proceedings and the implications of the departmental inquiry's outcome. (Paras 8, 12)

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the absence of a charge-sheet in the criminal case means no judicial proceeding was instituted, thus allowing the petitioner to receive his pension and benefits. (Paras 10, 12)

Result: The petitioner is entitled to regular pension and pensionary benefits from 01.09.2016.

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

N. Unni Krishnan Nair. J.

Heard Ms. S. Kanungoe, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. M.Bhattacharjee learned Additional Senior Government appearing for the State respondents.

2. The petitioner, by way of instituting the present proceeding, has prayed for the following reliefs: -

(i) By directing the respondent authorities to release regular pension and other pensionary benefits after calculating the 4(four) increments w.e.f. 2013- 16 and the promotion scale to the post of Superintendent due in the year 2014.

(ii) By directing the respondent authorities to grant 4(four) increments w.e.f. 2013 to 2016 and to give promotional scale to the post of Superintendent due in the year 2014.

(iii) By directing the respondent authorities to regularize the period of suspension as on duty, in the interest of justice.

After perusal of the records, cause or case shown if any and upon hearing the parties, Your Lordships may be pleased to make the Rule absolute and/or pass such appropriate Order/Orders or direction as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

3. The brief facts requisite for adjudication of the issue, arising in the present proceeding is noticed as under: -

The petitioner, while working as an Accountant, Treasury Establishment at Hailakandi, basing on an allegation of commission of misconduct by him on account of using the monogram of the Treasury Officer unauthorizedly, came to be placed under suspension vide an order dated 12.10.2011. Thereafter, a show-cause notice, under the provisions of Rule 9 of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964, came to be issued upon the petitioner on 29.11.2011. The petitioner had submitted his written statement against the show-cause notice dated 29.11.2011, on 08.12.2011. The said proceeding so drawn up against the petitioner was vide order dated 31.12.2011, closed with a warning issued to him which was also required to be recorded in his service book. The period of suspension undergone by the petitioner was directed to be treated as on leave.

Thereafter, basing on materials coming on record, with regard to commission of misconduct by the petitioner herein, the District Commissioner, Hailakandi, vide an order dated 12.04.2013, proceeded to place the petitioner herein, under suspension. An FIR was also submitted against the petitioner in the matter leading to registration of Hailakandi Police Station Case No. 115/2013, under Sections 25/420 of the IPC. The petitioner, who was arrested in connection with the said criminal case, was extended with the privilege of bail by this Court vide order dated 22.05.2013, passed in Bail Application No. 1198/2013.

The disciplinary authority of the petitioner, thereafter, instituted a departmental proceeding against the petitioner vide issuance of a show-cause notice dated 22.06.2013. The petitioner submitted his written statement in the matter, on 07.08.2013. The disciplinary authority not being satisfied with the written statement so submitted against him, directed for holding of a departmental enquiry in the matter and according, an enquiry officer and a presenting officer came to be appointed. The enquiry officer, thereafter, proceeded to conduct the enquiry and on conclusion of the same, submitted his enquiry report on 10.10.2014. The enquiry officer, in his enquiry report, concluded that the allegation leveled against the petitioner herein, could not be substantiated through concrete evidence and accordingly, the involvement of the petitioner in the matter of sale/issue of fake/counterfeit stamp papers could not be established. After submission of the said enquiry report, the disciplinary authority of the petitioner vide order dated 06.08.2015, proceeded to revoke the suspension of the petitioner and reinstated him in his service. The petitioner, thereafter, on attaining the age of superannuation, retired from his services w.e.f., 31.08.2016.

The departmental proceeding, having not been taken to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top