1. The petitioner superannuated from the office of Director Agriculture, Jammu, after completing 58 years of age in June, 1998. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he was entitled to the pensionary benefits on the date of his retirement but the respondents-authorities have withheld his legitimate pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity illegally, unlawfully and without any justification. According to the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner is stated to have made certain appointments to the class-IV posts after inviting applications and interview conducted by a Committee constituted by the petitioner and on the basis of recommendation of the Selection Committee, appointment orders were issued to 32 persons against class-IV vacancies. That the appointments were made strictly in accordance with the rules but still the respondents cancelled their appointment orders soon after the retirement of the petitioner and did not release his retiral benefits on superannuation. It was after more than one year of the retirement of the petitioner, the case of the petitioner was recommended to the Accountant General for the release of the provisional pension. Respondent no.2, in his recommendation dated 20.08.1999, intimated the Accountant General that the commuted pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity have been withheld pending settlement of allegation regarding appointment of class-IV posts made by the petitioner while in service, under Article 168-A of the J&K CSR. Further case of the petitioner is that in the absence of any allegation against the petitioner for having caused any loss to the government on account of his negligence, provision of Article 168-A of the J&K CSR is not attracted. That even when the case of the petitioner was recommended for provisional pension, no departmental proceedings were pending or instituted against the petitioner. It is also stated that the petitioner has been victimized, harassed and deprived of his retiral benefits on superannuation though No-Demand-Certificate stands issued by the respondents in his favour vide letter dated 20.08.1999 which clearly speaks of their mala fides. The petitioner, therefore, seeks the quashment of recommendation letter dated 20.08.1999 withholding the gratuity and commutation pension by issuance of a certiorari and further commanding the respondents to release the withheld pensionary benefits and gratuity in his favour from the date it fell due to him on superannuation with interest.

2. No counter was filed by the respondents despite opportunities. The right to file the counter was closed and the writ petition taken up for final hearing.

3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the record meticulously.

4. Mr. Vinod Bakshi, Dy.AG appearing for respondents, at the threshold submitted that no prima facie case was disclosed against the petitioner in case F.I.R.No.54/1998 by the Vigilance Organisation and on examining its report, the government directed departmental inquiry. He also stated that during departmental inquiry, the petitioner has been exonerated. According to Mr. Bakshi, the provisional pension was recommended to be released in favour of the petitioner under Article 168-A of the CSR during the pendency of the settlement of allegation regarding appointment of class-IV employees. His further submission is that the petitioner had made some illegal appointments regarding which F.I.R. No.54/1998 was registered. As regards the withholding of gratuity, Mr. Bakshi submitted that the same could not be released until the conclusion of the proceedings. Mr. Bakshi also contended that mere registration of a case against the petitioner was sufficient ground to deny full pension and withhold the gratuity.

5. The spinal question involved in this petition for consideration is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to full pension as due to him under Article 232 (Chapter XVIII) of the CSR. However, the provis

Click Here to Read the rest of this document