Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Harsimran Singh Sethi, J.
Bhagwati Devi - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana and others - Respondents - Respondent
CWP-1678 of 2018
Decided On : 08-08-2023
Disciplinary Proceedings - Recovery of Benefits - CWP No. 21917 of 2016 - CWP No. 21917 of 2016 - The court held that disciplinary proceedings cannot continue after the death of an employee and passing an order of recovery against a deceased employee is arbitrary and illegal.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's late husband, a Forest Guard, faced six disciplinary proceedings during his service. After his death, the Department imposed a recovery order of Rs.5,84,522 against him, which was challenged in the present petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that continuing disciplinary proceedings against a deceased employee and passing an order of recovery was arbitrary and illegal. The impugned order was set aside, and the petitioner was entitled to the leave encashment amount and interest on the retained benefits.
Issues: The main issue was whether disciplinary proceedings could continue after the death of an employee and if recovery orders against a deceased employee were valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that disciplinary proceedings cannot continue after the death of an employee, and passing recovery orders against a deceased employee is arbitrary and illegal.
Final Decision: The impugned order imposing recovery against the deceased employee was set aside, and the petitioner was entitled to the leave encashment amount and interest on the retained benefits.
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J.
1. Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 26.10.2017 (Annexure P-4) by which, the order imposing recovery has been passed by the Department against the late husband of the petitioner.
2. The facts which are necessary for the determination of the issue in hand are as cited below:-
3. The husband of petitioner namely Ramkishan was working as Forest Guard with the Department of Forest, Haryana. During the service career, certain disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him, which were pending consideration with the Department. The said proceedings started from the year 2009 onwards and total six disciplinary proceedings were being faced by the late husband of the petitioner.
4. Before the disciplinary proceedings could reach to its conclusion, the husband of the petitioner unfortunately died while in service on 25.09.2015. After the said date, the petitioner became entitled for the benefits in respect of the service rendered by her late husband but the benefits were not being released to her on the ground that her late husband was facing departmental enquiries, which departmental enquiries were still pending and till the said departmental proceedings reached its logical conclusion, no benefit in respect of the service rendered by the late husband of the petitioner, can be extended to the petitioner.
5. Ultimately, vide order dated 26.10.2017 (Annexure P-4), all the disciplinary proceedings pending against the late husband of the petitioner, were decided and after holding the husband of the petitioner guilty of the allegations, punishment of recovery of a sum of Rs.5,84,522/- was imposed upon the late husband of the petitioner. The leave encashment of the late husband of the petitioner was adjusted against the recovery order by the Department and remaining amount of Rs.2,700,62/- was waived off by the respondents. The said order dated 26.10.2017 (Annexure P-4) is under challenge in the present writ petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that in the present case, the moment, an employee against whom the disciplinary proceedings are pending, dies, the said proceedings cannot continue further and those proceedings abate hence, after the death of the husband of the petitioner, the disciplinary proceedings could not have been continued so as to hold him guilty of the allegations and to pass the impugned order directing the recovery of an amount of Rs.5,84,522/- from a deceased employee.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that once on the date when the husband of the petitioner died, there were six disciplinary proceedings pending against him, only those proceedings have been taken to the logical end after his death and the orders have been passed wherein, the husband of the petitioner was found guilty of the allegations and recovery of the loss suffered by the Department was ordered to be recovered.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.
9. The first question which arise in the present petition is whether, the proceedings which are pending against an employee during his service career, will remain intact after his/her death or the same will abate. The moment, an employee dies, the disciplinary proceedings cannot be allowed to continue as a dead person cannot defend himself/herself. Passing an order after the death of an employee so as to hold the said employee guilty, is not at all permissible. Furthermore, once after the death of an employee, there is no master and servant relationship exist, passing an order of recovery of an amount against a dead person and that too by proving the allegations, when there is no one to defend the alleged allegations, is totally arbitrary and illegal.
10. The said question of law already stands settled by this Court while passing order in CWP No.21917 of 2016 titled as Shiksha Devi vs. Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd, decid
Disciplinary proceedings cannot continue after the death of an employee, and passing recovery orders against a deceased employee is arbitrary and illegal.
The court established that chargesheets issued to a retired employee and recovery imposed after retirement were without jurisdiction. It also affirmed the entitlement of an employee to interest on de....
The death of an employee abates disciplinary proceedings, entitling the heirs to retirement benefits and settlement dues. Disciplinary proceedings against a deceased person cannot result in punishmen....
In the absence of disciplinary proceedings before the death of a government employee, recovery orders for alleged misappropriation of funds cannot be sustained, and the G.O.Ms.No.85, Finance and Plan....
Recovery of loss cannot be imposed without formal charges and an opportunity for explanation. Departmental enquiry cannot be initiated against a dead employee.
Recovery from retired employee's pensionary benefits impermissible post-retirement without statutory sanction.
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
