Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, P. KRISHNA KUMAR
State Of Kerala – Appellant
Versus
Sheela.K.R, W/o Sunil – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.
The point that arises for consideration is whether a Government servant who retired while a criminal case was pending is entitled to pensionary benefits on acquittal, despite the Government having preferred an appeal against such acquittal, and the same is pending before the Court. This point arises in the context of Rule 3 of Part III, KERALA SERVICE RULES (KSR).
Brief facts involved in this case are as follows:
2. The respondent, who was the applicant before the Tribunal, retired from the service of the Water Resources Department on 31/05/2020 as Chief Engineer. The respondent was granted only a provisional pension under Rule 3A(a) of Part III, KSR due to the pendency of criminal proceedings. At the time of retirement, an appeal was pending before the High Court against the judgment, dated 17/10/2018, of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Thrissur, acquitting the respondent. The prosecution alleged that the respondent, along with the other accused, misappropriated Rs. 86,558.55/- by committing forgery and making false entries in the ‘M’ book. It was categorically found by the Vigilance Court that the prosecution failed to prove
A government servant is entitled to pensionary benefits upon acquittal, regardless of pending appeals, as acquittal confirms innocence and prohibits arbitrary withholding of pension.
The pendency of an appeal is not a valid reason to deprive an employee of their pension and other service benefits, especially when no departmental proceedings were initiated against the employee.
The pendency of a criminal appeal against acquittal is not a valid reason to withhold pensionary benefits of an acquitted employee.
Service matter - Pension to State Employees - A criminal appeal cannot be taken out from definition of “judicial proceeding” and thereby, if one is acquitted but appeal thereupon is pending, he/she w....
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.
Pendency of a criminal appeal against an acquittal does not bar the release of pension and other retirement benefits.
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....
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
