JUDGMENT :

K. Vinod Chandran, J.

The identical issue agitated in both the Original Petitions, arising from separate orders in two Original Applications, is the justification for denial of Death- Cum-Retirement Gratuity [DCRG] after retirement, for reason of a criminal proceeding initiated against the government servants/applicants while in service; having not been finalized. The petitioners before us are the State and one of the Applicants before the Tribunal.

2. The Tribunal, in its order from which O.P[KAT] No.78 of 2015 arises, declined the claim for disbursement of DCRG. The Tribunal's decision was based on the fact that the Applicant stood convicted by the Vigilance Court and he has to wait for the conclusion of the appeal filed by him. The Tribunal also held that if the Applicant is exonerated, then he would be entitled to DCRG; which otherwise would stand permanently withheld. O.P[KAT] No. 428 of 2019 is by the State against the order of the Tribunal directing disbursal of DCRG. The reasoning of the Tribunal therein was, that the appeal against the conviction and sentence filed by the Government servant, is not a judicial proceeding against him. The vigilance proceedings initia