Proper notice as required under Rule 8 of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976, must be given before forfeiting a pension.

S.C. SHARMA, J.

1. The petitioner before this Court has filed this present writ petition being aggrieved by the order dated 8/12/2014 (Annexure P/1) and order dated 20/1/2015 by which the respondents have passed an order of forfeiting the entire pension of the petitioner. The aforesaid order has been passed under Rule 9 of the M. P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, has raised a preliminary objection in respect of the impugned order. His contention is that no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner while passing an order of stoppage of pension. It is submitted that Rule 8 has to be read in consonance with Rule 9 of the Rules of 1976 and a proper Show Cause Notice has to be issued to the pensioner before passing any order forfeiting the pension. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed heavy reliance upon the judgment delivered by the Chattisgarh High Court in the case of Jagatnarain Tripathi v. State of Chattisgarh and others reported in 2009 (3) MPHT 81 (CG).

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent - State has vehemently argued before this Court that keeping in view Rule 9 of the Rules of 1976, the question of granting any notice to the petitioner does not arise and his contention is that the order has been passed in consultation with the M. P. Public Service Commission and does not warrant any interference by this Court. It has been contended that once the petitioner has been convicted for an offence punishable u/Ss. 120-B, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the question of interference does not arise as the petitioner has been punished with imprisonment of 3 years.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.

5. This Court has carefully gone through the judgment delivered by the Chattisgarh High Court in the case of Jagatnarain Tripathi (supra). The Chattisgarh High Court was handling with a similar case relating to M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976. The Chattisgarh High Court, in paragraph No. 6 to 15 has held as under :

6. The short question involved in this petition is whether the respondents could withhold payment of pension to the petitioner in exercise of power under Rule 8(1)(b) of the Rules, 1976? Rule 8 is reproduced as under:-

"8. Pension subject to future good conduct.- (1)(a) Future good conduct shall be an implied condition of every grant of pension and its continuance under these rules.

(b) 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 at the time of retirement of the pensioner, to make an appointment to the post held by him immediately before his retirement from service:

Provided further that where a part of pension is withheld or withdrawn, the amount of such pension shall not be reduced below [the minimum pension as determined by the Government from time to time].

(2) Where a pensioner is convicted of a serious crime by a court of law, action under clause (b) of sub-rule (1) shall be taken in the light of the judgment of the court relating to such conviction.

(3) In a case not falling under sub-rule (2), if the authority referred to in sub-rule (1) considers that the pensioner is prima facie guilty of grave misconduct, it shall before passing an order under sub-rule (1):-

(a) serve upon the pensioner a notice specifying the action proposed to be taken against him and the ground on which it is proposed to be taken and calling upon him to submit, within fifteen days of the receipt of the notice or such further time not exceeding fifteen days as may be allowed by the pension sanctioning authority, such representation as he may wish to mak