Back
B. R. SARANGI, SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Swetabh Kumar, son of Late B. S. Sinha – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
Prayer
1. The instant appeal preferred under Clause-10 of Letters Patent is directed against the order dated 17.03.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(S) No.5009 of 2022, whereby and whereunder, the writ petition has been dismissed by declining to interfere with the decision taken by the authority withholding the pension to the extent of 10 per cent for two years.
Facts
2. The brief fact of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition, required to be enumerated, which reads as under:-
3. It is the case of the writ petitioner that he has retired from the post of Engineer-in-Chief, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi on 28.2.2022. There is an allegation that while he was posted as Superintending Engineer, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Urban Circle, Ranchi, he technically sanctioned a construction of brick masonry Channel with RCC Culvert in 1st phase pipe in filtration plant campus at Rukka under DW & S, S/R Head Works Division, Ranchi for a sum of Rs.26,22,247.00/- on 10.12.2012.
4. It is the case of the writ petitioner, appellant herein, that the entire service period
The entire service record must be evaluated before withholding pension; a single instance of irregularity does not justify such action.
A government employee's pension can only be reduced for proven grave misconduct, not based solely on isolated allegations, following proper procedural safeguards.
The decision to withhold a pension under Rule 43(a) of the Pension Rule should be based on future conduct, and if based on past conduct, Rule 43(b) should be invoked instead.
Authority cannot invoke pension reduction after full pension has been sanctioned; revisional powers are reserved for the State Government under Rule 139(c) of Jharkhand Pension Rules.
Pension and gratuity cannot be withheld without proper proceedings and findings of misconduct; Rule 43(c) requires adherence to principles of natural justice.
The main legal point established is that the principle of natural justice must be observed even if there is no specific reference in the rule, especially if the consequence of the decision is going t....
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
