A government employee's pension can only be reduced for proven grave misconduct, not based solely on isolated allegations, following proper procedural safeguards.

JUDGMENT :

RAJESH SHANKAR, J.

1. I.A No. 1797 of 2025 (in L.P.A No. 358 of 2025) has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to condone the delay of 145 days occurred in filing the present appeal.

2. I.A No. 6797 of 2025 (in L.P.A No. 719 of 2025) has been filed for condonation of delay of 93 days occurred in filing the present appeal.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and on being satisfied with the reasons set out in the present interlocutory applications, the said delay occurred in filing the present appeals is hereby condoned.

4. The present interlocutory applications are accordingly disposed of.

Facts of the cases

5. L.P.A No. 358 of 2025 is directed against the judgment/order dated 20.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 4959 of 2022 whereby the order as contained in Memo No. 4250 dated 08.08.2022 issued by the Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Jharkhand (the appellant No.2) imposing penalty of 5% deduction from the pension of the respondent/writ petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the R1) for a period of two years, has been quashed observing that the initiation of departmental proceeding under Rule 139 of the Jharkhand Pension Rules, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules, 2000’) can be exercised, if the entire service carrier of an employee has been found to be unsatisfactory.

6. L.P.A No. 719 of 2025 is directed against the judgment/order dated 20.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 4967 of 2022 whereby the order as contained in Memo No. 4235 dated 05.08.2022 issued under the signature of the appellant No.2 imposing penalty of 5% deduction from the pension of the respondent/writ petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the R2) for a period of two years, has been quashed on the same reasons as mentioned hereinabove.

7. The R1 was appointed on the post of Assistant Engineer, Irrigation Department, Government of Bihar in the light of order as contained in Memo No. 399 dated 25.01.1979. He retired from the post of Engineer-in- Chief-I, Department of Water Resources, Government of Jharkhand on 30.04.2017 and his pension was also approved by the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Jharkhand, Ranchi.

8. Subsequently, an explanation was sought from R1 vide letter No. 2993 dated 14.07.2018 issued under the signature of Special Secretary to the Government, Water Resources Department with respect to the alleged irregularities committed in restoration works of three schemes pertaining to disposal of desilting soil accumulated after Canal Bed Clearance during his period of posting as Superintending Engineer, Waterways Circle, Hazaribagh in the year 2014-15.

9. The R1 replied the said letter by attaching the copy of charge report wherein it was stated that he had taken the additional charge of Superintending Engineer, Water Ways Circle, Hazaribagh from his predecessor-in-office w.e.f 31.01.2015 and was relieved on 14.10.2016 (afternoon).

10. However, a second show cause notice was served on him vide letter No. 2712 dated 28.06.2021 issued under the signature of the appellant No.2 stating that his reply to the earlier show cause notice was not accepted and in the light of Rule 139 of the Jharkhand Pension Rules, 2000, it was proposed to award him punishment of deduction of 5% of his pension for a period of two years.

11. Finally, the R1 was awarded punishment of deduction of 5% of his pension for a period of two years vide the order as contained in Memo No. 4250 dated 08.08.2022 issued under the signature of the appellant No.2.

1