The principles of natural justice are excluded and have no application to cases falling under Rule 8(2) of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1976, and no notice or prior opportunity of representation is required before passing the order under Rule 8(2) in respect of a pensioner convicted in criminal cases.

JUDGMENT

This intra Court appeal is filed being aggrieved by the order dated 01.09.2015 (Annexure-A-1) passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition No.14026 of 2015(s) filed by the appellant herein.

2. The facts of the case are that the appellant was working as Cashier in Government Boys Higher Secondary School No.1, Sehore. He was convicted and sentenced for various offences under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and IPC vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29.07.2011 in Special Case No.04 of 2005 (State of M.P. vs. Vinod Kumar Parihar and others) by Special Court Prevention of Corruption Act, Sehore. The maximum sentence was of two years and fine was also imposed as mentioned in paragraph 33 of the judgment of conviction and sentence. The appellant was one of the accused and the other accused were also convicted and sentenced by the same judgment.

3. Upon his conviction and sentence, the State Government vide order dated 26.05.2011 in exercise of power vested under Rule 9 of M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1976 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules of 1976”) withheld the pension of the appellant on account of his conviction and sentence.

4. The appellant challenged the order of withholding of pension before the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge did not find any substance in the writ petition and, therefore, the same has been dismissed. The appellant is, therefore, in the present intra court appeal.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the sentence of the appellant has already been suspended by this Court vide order dated 24.08.2011 in Criminal Appeal No.1867 of 2011 and his appeal is still pending. He further submits that the impugned order could not have been passed by under Secretary as in accordance with the Rules of 1976, only Governor is empowered to take a decision and lastly, his submission is that without extending an opportunity of hearing, order of withholding full pension of the appellant could not have been taken. He places reliance Full Bench decision of this Court in the matter of Ram Sewak Mishra vs. State of M.P. and another, 2017 (4) M.P.L.J. 428 and he submits that the learned Single Judge has erred in dismissing the writ petition.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the State opposed the submissions put forth by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. He states that the order of withholding of full pension of the appellant has been passed in the name of Governor of the State of M.P. and, therefore, the same is an order passed by the State Government and Under Secretary has only issued the order, as per the rules of business. He further submits that no opportunity of hearing is required before passing an order of withholding pension. In addition, he submits that the larger Bench of this Court in the matter of Lal Sahab Bairagi vs. State of M.P. and others, 2020(2) M.P.L.J. 551 has overruled the judgment of Full Bench in the case of Ram Sewak Mishra1 and it has been held that the State Government is not required to issue notice or afford an opportunity of hearing before passing the order under the Rules of 1976 for withholding pension on conviction.

7. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record.

8. A perusal of Clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 would show that 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. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 8 stipulates that 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. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 9 of the Rules of 1976 provides that the Governor reserve to himself the right of withholding or withdrawing a pension or part thereof, whether permane