The Governor's exclusive right to withhold or withdraw a pension after retirement, and the limitations on imposing dismissal from service after retirement, unless specific rules permit such action.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Amit Bose, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Mohd. Shujauddin Waris for the appellant-petitioner and the learned State Counsel representing the State-respondents.

2. We have also perused the record available before us on this Special Appeal.

3. By means of this Special Appeal instituted under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Rules of the Court, challenge has been made by the appellant-petitioner to a judgment and order dated 11.08.2021, passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.7483(SS) of 2019 whereby the writ petition has been dismissed and the order dated 01.11.2018 reiterating the order of dismissal of the appellant-petitioner has been affirmed.

4. The appellant-petitioner was recruited as Constable of Armed Police in the establishment of the Uttar Pradesh Police. On certain charges relating to obtaining employment on the basis of certain allegedly forged education certificates, he was dismissed from service by means of an order dated 20.06.2009, passed by the Superintendent of Police, Sultanpur. The said order of dismissal was challenged by the appellant-petitioner by filing Writ Petition No.5847(SS) of 2009, which was allowed by this Court by means of order dated 11.09.2013 whereby the order of dismissal passed by the Superintendent of Police, Sultanpur dated 20.06.2009 was set aside with the direction that the appellant-petitioner will be reinstated in service. While allowing the Writ Petition No.5847(SS) of 2009, this Court further observed that it will be open to the Superintendent of Police, Ambedkar Nagar to take action in accordance with law.

5. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 11.09.2013, passed by this Court, the appellant-petitioner was reinstated by means of order dated 31.01.2014, passed by the Superintendent of Police, Ambedkar Nagar, however, the departmental proceedings were further carried against the appellant-petitioner and he was again dismissed from service by means of order dated 04.07.2014, passed by the Superintendent of Police, Ambedkar Nagar. By means of another order passed on the same day i.e. 04.07.2014, the representation of the appellant-petitioner regarding payment of back wages was also rejected.

6. Both the aforesaid two orders dated 04.07.2014 whereby the appellant-petitioner was dismissed from service and his claim for payment of back wages was rejected became the subject matter of the Writ Petition No.5703(SS) of 2014 which was decided by the learned Single Judge of this Court by means of an order dated 13.03.2018. By the said order, the order of dismissal dated 04.07.2014 was set aside with the further stipulation therein that the Superintendent of Police, Ambedkar Nagar shall pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The reason indicated in the order dated 13.03.2018, passed by this Court while quashing the order of punishment of dismissal was that the order of punishment of dismissal which was challenged did not refer to the show cause notice and the reply submitted by the appellant-petitioner to the said show cause notice and accordingly it was held that the appellant-petitioner was denied opportunity of hearing.

7. The appellant-petitioner, in the meantime, attained the age of superannuation on 31.05.2015. In compliance of the order dated 13.03.2018, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 5703(SS) of 2014, a show cause notice was given to the appellant-petitioner on 22.05.2018 to which he submitted his reply by means of his letter dated 23.07.2018. The Superintendent of Police, Ambedkar Nagar thereafter passed the order dated 01.11.2018 who reiterated the earlier order of dismissal and further stated that it will not be lawful to reinstate the appellant-petitioner in service. It is this order dated 01.11.2018 which was challenged by the appellant-petitioner by instituting the proceedings of Writ Petition No.7483(SS) of 2019, which has been dismissed by means of judgment and order dated 11.08.2021, which is under challenge herein.

8. Learn