The court upheld the withholding of pension based on conviction, affirming that no prior show-cause notice is required under pension rules upon such conviction.

ORDER :

BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY, J.

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. S. Mallik, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. S. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties.

3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:-

“Under the aforesaid facts and circumstance the petitioner humbly prays that this Hon’ble court may graciously be pleased to:

i. Quash the order dt.03.10.2025 as at Annexure 2 with a concurrent direction to reconsider implosion of lesser penalty taking into consideration the gravity of misconduct.

ii. And to pass such other order(s) / direction(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.

And for this act of kindness the petitioner as on duty bound ever pray.”

4. It is contended that after his retirement Petitioner was not sanctioned with the pension, save and except the provisional pension on the ground of pendency of a vigilance proceeding in VGR Case No. 4/2007 in the file of learned Addl. District Judge-cum-Special Judge (Vigilance), Dhenkanal.

4.1. It is contended that Petitioner when was convicted in the said vigilance proceeding vide Judgment dtd.16.12.2023 under Annexure-1, without issuing a show-cause, the impugned order has been passed on 03.10.2025 under Annexure-2, directing for stoppage of pension and gratuity in full and permanently and the period of suspension has been treated as such.

4.2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that since prior to passing of such order, Petitioner has not been provided with the show-cause in terms of the provisions contained under Rule 6 of OCS (Pension) Rules, 1992 (in short Rules), such an order could not have been passed. It is further contended that period of suspension could not have been treated as such in exercise of power conferred under Rule 7 of the Rules.

4.3. It is further contended that even though Petitioner challenging such order of conviction and sentence has already moved this Court by filing Criminal Appeal No. 1389 of 2023 and Petitioner has been allowed to go on bail, during pendency of the appeal, which is in the nature of continuation of the proceeding, Petitioner could not have been imposed with the punishment vide the impugned order under Annexure-2. It is accordingly contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law and requires interference of this Court with adjudication.

5. Mr. S. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand basing on the available materials contended that since Petitioner has been convicted in the vigilance proceeding vide Judgment dtd.16.12.2023 under Annexure-1. In view of the provisions contained under Rule 6 r.w. Rule 7 of the OCS (Pension) Rules, 1992, Petitioner forfeits all his right to get the pensionary benefits unless and until that order of conviction and sentence is set aside by appropriate Court. Rule 6 & 7 of the Rules reads as follows:-

“6. Pension Subject to Future Good Conduct- (1) Future good conduct shall be an implied condition of every grant of pension and its continuance under these rules.

(2) The pension sanctioning authority may by order in writing, withhold or withdraw a pension or part thereof, whether permanently or for a specified period, if the pensioner is convicted of a serious crime or is found guilty of grave misconduct; Provided that no such order shall be passed by an authority subordinate to the authority competent to make an appointment to the post held by the pensioner immediately before his retirement from service: Provided further that where a part of pension is withheld or withdrawn, the amount of such pension sh