Back
SHEEL NAGU
Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judicial review limited to statutory applicability. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. statutory bar protects retired employees from delayed actions. (Para 4) |
| 3. both clauses of rule 9(2)(b) must be satisfied for valid charges. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. charge-sheet quashed due to statutory violations. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER :
Sheel Nagu, J.
CONTENT AND CONTEXT
Petitioners, three in number who have retired from the post of Deputy Director (in case of petitioner No. 1), Assistant Director (in case of petitioner No. 2) and Sericulture Inspector (in case of petitioner No. 3), have preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking quashment of common disciplinary proceedings commenced against them vide Annexure P/5 dated 21-5-2021 inter alia on the ground that the same are statutorily barred by Rule 9(2)(b)(ii) of Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (“Pension Rules” for brevity).
2. Since a pure legal question is raised, this Court refrains from entering into the merits of the charges alleged and restricts judicial scrutiny to the applicability/non-applicability of the statutory bar contained in Rule 9(2)(b)(ii) of the Pension Rules.
FACTS
3. The foundational facts nece
Disciplinary charges against retired government servants must adhere to the four-year statute of limitations outlined in Rule 9(2)(b)(ii) of the Pension Rules, irrespective of prior sanctions obtaine....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that departmental proceedings against a retired employee cannot be initiated after 4 years from the date of the alleged incident, as per Rule 2.2 (....
The issuance of charge sheets before retirement is sufficient to initiate departmental proceedings, regardless of when they are served, thus not violating the four-year limitation for initiating such....
A charge memo against a retired government employee is invalid if issued beyond the four-year limitation period and is legally unsustainable if based on vague charges.
Pension rights are vested and cannot be arbitrarily denied; disciplinary actions post-retirement must adhere to statutory limits prohibiting proceedings for incidents beyond four years.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Rule 8 (2) (c) (ii) of the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 2021, regarding the limitation of depart....
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
