Hon’ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra, J.—These two writ petitions have been filed by the retired employees of the State Government involving similar issues and therefore, although the facts of both writ petitions are different, they are being considered together. In Writ A No. 9126 of 2015, the arguments were heard and judgment was reserved on 4.7.2017 and in Writ A No. 14350 of 2014, the arguments were heard and judgment was reserved on 26.7.2017.

2. In Writ Petition No. 9126 of 2015, the petitioner-Tirath Raj Tripathi has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Superintending Engineer, Kanpur Circle, PWD, Kanpur Nagar to pay retiral benefits, gratuity and regular final pension with interest to the petitioner forthwith.

3. The petitioner Tirath Raj Tripathi was working as Senior Assistant in Public Works Department, Kanpur on 31.7.2002 when he was implicated in a criminal case where the U.P. Vigilance Establishment lodged an FIR against him on 31.7.2002 which was registered as Case Crime No. 324 of 2004 under Section 7/13(1D) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the petitioner was sent to jail on 31.7.2002 and released on bail on 27.8.2002. On the basis of his being sent to jail, the petitioner was suspended on 31.7.2002. The petitioner filed a Writ Petition No. 46319 of 2002 challenging the suspension order and this Court set aside the suspension order on 21.11.2002 and he was reinstated in service on 5.6.2003. Thereafter, the petitioner continued to perform his duty and was retired on 31.11.2012 from the post of Head Assistant. Since his retirement, he has filed several representations, but his pension, gratuity and other retiral dues have not been released only due to the reason of pendency of criminal case against the petitioner under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that pendency of any judicial proceedings cannot be a ground to exercise the power under Section 351-A of the Civil Service Regulation for withholding retiral dues. The petitioner has placed reliance upon a judgment rendered by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 3.2.2015 in Writ-A No. 67791 of 2014 where in a similar matter, this Court after placing reliance upon two Division Bench Judgments of this Court having found that since in the criminal case, there is no allegation of loss to the Government and therefore no recovery has to be made from the petitioner (which is the only exception recognised by this Court, in the Division Bench judgments relied upon by it) has directed that the petitioners’ retiral benefits be released to him and his final pension be fixed and paid.

5. On the other hand, Sri B.K. Yadav, learned standing counsel has pointed out from the counter-affidavit that while the petitioner was working as Senior Assistant in Public Works Department, Kanpur on 31.7.2002, the petitioner was caught red handed for taking bribe of Rs. 500/- by the Vigilance Establishment and a criminal case was registered as mentioned aforesaid, which is pending before the Competent Court. The Group Insurance and provident fund dues have already been paid to the petitioner, provisional pension is also being given. However, release of gratuity, final pension and other dues cannot be made till such time that the criminal case is pending before the Competent Court.

6. In Writ Petition No. 14350 of 2014, Retired Head Constable Kare Singh has prayed for a mandamus to the authorities to pay his retiral dues as he retired on 28.2.2010.

7. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the State respondents wherein they have stated that the petitioner stands convicted in Sessions Trial No. 313 of 2001, (State of U.P. v. Ramwati) connected with Sessions Trial No. 252 of 2003 (State of U.P. v. Kare Singh) and the petitioner has been sentenced under various Sections of the I.P.C., with rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and fine. The petitioner has filed rejoinder-affidavit to the sa