Back
FARJAND ALI
Sunita Dixit, W/o. Shri Bhupendra Dixit – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through The Director, Secondary Education, Government Of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
(Farjand Ali, J.)
1. By way of filing this wit petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 25.01.2022 (Annexure-3) passed by the respondent No.2 to the extent it relates to withholding her all the retiral benefits.
2. Bereft of elaborated details, the brief facts necessary for disposal of the instant writ petition are as under :-
2.1. The petitioner was appointed as Librarian in the respondent-department in the year 1985; however, in a criminal case registered against her in the year 1996, she was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 306 of IPC by the learned trial court vide judgment dated 01.05.2000.
2.2. Against the judgment of conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred a criminal appeal, S.B. Criminal Appeal No.215/2000 (Smt. Sunita Dixit Vs. State of Rajasthan). before this Court, which was admitted and the sentence awarded to her was suspended vide order dated 23.05.2000. The appeal is pending for final adjudication.
2.3. Subsequently, the respondent-department vide order dated 01.06.2000 suspended the petitioner while serving her a charge-sheet under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958
Pension and gratuity cannot be withheld due to unrelated criminal proceedings; provisional pension must be granted during appeal.
Retiral benefits cannot be withheld based solely on the registration of FIRs without a challan being presented at the time of retirement.
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....
Pension is a property right that cannot be withheld without lawful authority; withholding based on proceedings initiated post-retirement is unlawful, and interest must be paid for delays in disbursem....
Withholding retiral benefits based solely on the pendency of an FIR is unjustified without a charge-sheet being filed.
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.
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
