IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
(FULL BENCH)
Hemant Gupta, C.J., Sujoy Paul and Subodh Abhyankar, JJ.
Ram Sewak Mishra v. State of M.P. and another
Writ Petition No.1353 of 2011(Jabalpur);Decided on 18.7.2017
Per Hemant Gupta, C.J. and Subodh Abhyankar, J.
Held : We find that though the applicability of principals of natural justice can be excluded by necessary implication but the requirement of giving reasonable opportunity of being heard before an order is made, is generally read into the provisions of a statute, particularly when the order has adverse civil consequences relating to infraction of property, personal rights and material deprivations for the party affected. The rule of audi alteram partem is the rule of the law without which law would be lifeless, absurd, stultifying, self-defeating or plainly contrary to the common sense of the situation. The principle holds good irrespective of whether the power conferred on a statutory body or Tribunal is administrative or quasi-judicial.
(2) Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (M.P.) -- R.8(1),(2) and (3) -- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 -- S.7-- petitioner convicted for offence under -- appeal pending and sentence suspended -- he attained age of superannuation -- anticipatory pension granted -- whether without providing hearing opportunity -- entire pension can be withheld under rule 8 -- pension is not bounty -- but benefit earned by him by serving State for many years -- deprivation of such pension affects civil rights of pensioner -- though rule 8(2) is silent about opportunity of hearing -- even so show cause notice is required to be given to retired Government servant convicted by criminal Court.
Per Majority --
Held : The judgment of Full Bench in the case of Laxmi Narayan Hayaran’s case (supra), deals with a situation of termination of an employee on account of conviction in a criminal trial. The said judgment of dispensing with the opportunity of hearing to a pensioner cannot be extended to a case of stoppage of pension.
The pensioner is entitled to pension in view of his past service under the State. An employee earns his pension. Pension is not a bounty, but a benefit earned by him by serving State for many years. The deprivation of such pension affects civil rights of the pensioner, the means of survival. Though sub-rule (2) of rule 8 of the Pension Rules is silent about opportunity of hearing, but neither the dispensing with an opportunity of hearing is urgent nor is any other purpose expected to be achieved by denying the benefit of opportunity of hearing.
If an opportunity of hearing is granted, an employee can point out the mitigating family circumstance, the role in the criminal trial which led to his conviction or other circumstances as to why the pension should not be stopped and that too for life. Therefore, in case of a pensioner, the rule of natural justice would warrant an opportunity of hearing, at least of serving a show cause and elucidating the reply of the pensioner and thereafter, pass an order as may be considered appropriate by the authority so as to enable the appellate authority or the judicial Courts to test the legality of the same while exercising the powers of the judicial review.
Thus, the first question of law is answered that a show cause notice is required to be given to the retired Government servant convicted by the criminal Court. As a consequence thereof, we find that the order passed by this Court in the case of Dau Ram Maheshwar (supra), is correctly decided. 2017(1) MPLJ 640 affirmed. 2005(1) JLJ 125 (FB) and 1994 JLJ 587 (SC) distinguished. (1978)1 SCC 405, (1981)1 SCC 664 and (2011)2 SCC 258 followed. (1970)2 SCC 458, AIR 1967 SC 1269, (1971)2 SCC 330, (1973)1 SCC 120, (1976)2 SCC 1, (1987)2 SCC 179 and (2007)2 SCC 181 referred to. (1985)3 SCC 398, discussed. [Para 16
(3) Interpretation of Statutes -- rule of -- depend on text and context -- neither can be ignored -- both are important -- best interpretation is which makes textual interpretation match contextual.
Per Sujoy Paul, J. (Dissenting)
Held : The golden rule of interpretation of a statute is that interpretation must depend on the text and the context. Neither can be ignored. Both are important. That interpretation is best which makes the textual interpretation match the contextual. (1987)1 SCC 424, referred to.
(4) Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (M.P.) -- R.8(1), (2) and (3) -- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 -- S.7-- retired convicted servant under -- without providing hearing opportunity -- whether pension can be withheld -- principles of natural justice -- applicability of -- rule 8(2) does not expressly excludes -- under rule 8(3) -- principles of natural justice inserted in mandatory form -- rule 8(2) impliedly excluded principles of natural justice -- providing hearing opportunity to such servant -- not required -- decision needs to be taken by competent authority in light of judgment relating to such conviction.
Per Sujoy Paul, J. (Dissenting)
Held : In my view sub-rule (2) of rule 8 does not expressly excludes the application of principles of natural justice. Sub-rule (3), as noticed, provides an opportunity of hearing when competent authority considers that pensioner is prima facie guilty of grave misconduct. In sub-rule (3), principles of natural justice were inserted in a mandatory form, whereas in sub-rule (2), it is provided that action shall be taken in the light of the judgment of the Court relating to such conviction. In the manner sub-rule (2) is worded, in my considered opinion, it has impliedly excluded the principles of natural justice.
In my considered opinion, neither in rule 19 of CCA rules nor in sub-rule (2) of rule 8, principles of natural justice can be read into. Indeed, principles of natural justice are excluded by implication in both the aforesaid provisions for same reasons. The sole basis of decision of competent authority will depend upon judgment of conviction arising out of conduct/crime of delinquent.
In view of aforesaid analysis, my opinion regarding question No.1 is that no opportunity of hearing is required to be given to a retired Government servant before taking a decision under sub-rule (1) of rule 8 and such decision needs to be taken by competent authority in the light of the judgment of the Court relating to such conviction. Since rule 8(2) impliedly excludes the principles of natural justice, this Court cannot ignore the mandate of statutory authority and read into the provision concern the principles of natural justice. (1970)2 SCC 458, (1978)1 SCC 248, (1994)5 SCC 267 and (2010)13 SCC 255 followed. (1976)3 SCC 190 referred to. (1985)3 SCC 398 discussed.
[Para 16
Majority opinion--
In view of the majority opinion, it is held that opportunity of hearing is required to be provided before an order of stoppage of pension is passed under section 8(2) of the Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 and that judgment of Dau Ram Maheshwar v. State of M.P. and another, reported as [(2017)1 MPLJ 640], is correctly decided. (2017)1 MPLJ 640 affirmed.
¼1½ uSlfxZd U;k; && fl)kar dk ykxw gksuk && vko';d foo{kk }kjk vioftZr fd;k tk ldrk gS && lquokbZ dk volj iznku djus dh vis{kk lkekU;r% dkuwu ds mica/kksa esa i<+h tkrh gS && fo'ks"kr% tc vkns'k O;fDrxr vf/kdkj izfrdwy :i ls izHkkfor djrk gS && ,slk vkns'k ikfjr djus ls ioZ && lquokbZ dk volj iznku fd;k tkuk pkfg, && fdlh O;fDRk ds fo:) fu.kZ; nsus ls iwoZ mls lquuk vfuok;Z gS dk fu;e && fof/k dk fu;e gS && ftlds fcuk fof/k fu%lRo gksxh && cgqer jk; && lquokbZ dk volj iznku fd;k tkuk pkfg,A
eq[; U;k- gsear xqIrk RkFkk U;k- lqcks/k vH;adj &&
vfHkfu/kkZfjr % ge ikrs gS fd uSlfxZd U;k; ds fl)kar dk ykxw gksuk vko'd foo{kk }kjk vioftZr fd;k tk ldrk gS fdarq vkns'k fd, tkus ls iwoZ lquokbZ dk volj nsus dh vis{kk] lkekU;r% dkuwu ds mic/akksa esa i<+h tkrh gS] fo'ks"kr% tc vkns'k LoRo ds O;frØe ds lac/k esa izfrdwy flfoy ifj.kke j[krk gS] O;fDrxr vf/kdkj vkSj i{kdkj ds fy, vkfFkZd gkfu igqWpkrk gSA fdlh O;fDr ds fo:) fu.kZ; nsus ds iwoZ mls lquuk vfuok;Z gS dk fu;e fof/k dk fu;e gS ftlds fcuk fof/k] fu%lRo] vFkZghu] fujFkZd ;k Li"V;k lkekU; cqf) dh vofLFkfr ds izfrdwy gSA dkuwuh fudk; ;k vf/kdj.k dks iznŸk 'kfDr pkgs iz'kklfud ;k U;kf;d dYi dh gks bldk /;ku fn, fcuk fu;e leqfpr gSA
¼2½ flfoy lsok isa'ku fu;e] 1976 ¼e-iz-½ && fu-8¼1½¼2½ rFkk ¼3½ && Hkz"Vkpkj fuokj.k vf/kfu;e] 1988 && /kkjk 7 && ;kph mica/k ds v/khu vijk/k ds fy, fl)nks"k Bgjk;k x;k && vihy yafcr rFkk naM+kns'k fuyafcr && mlus vf/kof"kZrk dh vk;q iw.kZ dh && izR;kf'kr isa'ku iznku dh xbZ && D;k lquokbZ dk volj iznku fd, fcuk && fu;e 8 ds v/khu laiw.kZ isU'ku jksdh tk ldrh gS && isa'ku dksbZ mnkj nku ugha gS && cfYd jkT; dh vusd o"kZ lsok djus ls@mls ykHk vfTkZr gqvk gS && ,slh isa'ku ls oafpr djus ls isa'kuj ds flfoy vf/kdkj izHkkfor gksrs gS && ;|fi fu;e 8¼2½ lquokbZ ds volj ds fo"k; esa ekSu gS && rc Hkh naM+ U;k;ky; }kjk fl)nks"k Bgjk, x, lsok fuo`Ÿk ljdkjh lsod dk dkj.k crkvks lwpuk fn;k tkuk visf{kr gSA
eq[; U;k- gsear xqIrk rFkk U;k] lqcks/k vH;adj &&
vfHkfu/kkZfjr % y{ehukjk;.k g;kj.k ds ekeys es a¼iwoksZDr½ iw.kZ U;k;ihB ds fu.kZ; esa nkafM+d fopkj.k esa fl)nks"k deZpkjh dh lsok lekfIr dh fLFkfr ij fopkj fd;k x;k gSA is'kuj dks lquokbZ ds volj ls vfHkeqDr djus dk mi;qZDr fu.kZ; jksdus ds ekeys es ykxw ugha fd;k tk ldrkA
;kph jkT; ds v/khu xr lsok dh n`f"V ls is'ku dk gd~nkj gSA deZpkjh viuh isa'ku mikftZr djrk gS isa'ku mnkjrk dk nku ugh gS] cfYd mlds }kjk jkT; dks vusd o"kZ nh xbZ lsokvksa dk ykHk gSA ,slh isa'ku ls oafapr djuk mlds flfoy vf/kdkjksa dks] mŸkjthfork ds lk/ku dks izHkkfor djrk gSA ;|fi isa'ku fu;eksa ds fu;e 8 dk mi&fue ¼2½ lquokbZ ds volj ds fo"k; esa ekSUk gS] fdUrq lquokbZ dk volj ls vfHkeqDRk djuk vR;ko';d ugha gS vkSj u gh lquokbZ ds Qk;nk ls badkj djus ls dksbZ vU; iz;kstu izkIr djuk visf{kr gSA
;fn lquokbZ dk volj iznku fd;k tkrk gS] deZpkjh vius dqVqac dh de djus okyh ifjfLFkfr;kW crk ldrk gS] nkafM+d fopkj.k esa Hkwfedk ftlls mls fl) nks"k Bgjk;k gS ;k vU; ifjfLFkfr;ksa tSls fd isU'ku D;ksa ugh jksdh tkuh pkfg, vkSj og Hkh thou ds fy,A blfy,] ;kph ds ekeys es uSlfxZd U;k; dk fu;e lquokbZ ds volj dk vf/kdkj nsxk] de ls de dkj.k crkvks lwpuk dk fuokZg djuk vkSj ;kph ds tokc ij Li"Vhdj.k fn;k tkuk vkSj rRi'pkr~ izkf/kdkjh }kjk tSlk mfpr le>k tk, vkns'k ikfjr fd;k tk, ftlls fd tc dHkh vihy izkf/kdkjh ;k U;kf;d U;k;ky; iqufoZyksdu dh 'kfDRk dk iz;ksx dj mldh oS|rk dk ijh{k.k djus esa leFkZ gks ldsA
bl izdkj] fof/k ds izFke iz'u dk mŸkj fn;k tkrk gS fd naM+ U;k;ky; }kjk fl)nks"k Bgjk, x, lsok fuo`Ÿk ljdkjh lsod dks dkj.k crkvks lwpuk fn;k tkuk visf{kr gSA blds ifj.kkeLo:i] ge ikrs gSA 2017¼1½ ,e ih ,y ts 640 vfHkiq"VA 2005 ¼1½ ts ,y ts 125 ¼iw.kZ U;k;ihB½ rFkk 1994 ts ,y ts 587 ¼mPpre U;k-½ izHksfnrA ¼1978½ 1 ,Lk lh lh 405] ¼1981½ 1 ,y lh lh 664 rFkk ¼2011½ 2 ,l lh lh 258 vuqlfjrA ¼1970½ 2 ,l lh lh 458] , vkb vkj 1967 ,l lh 1269] ¼1971½ 2 ,l lh lh 330] ¼1973½ 1 ,l lh lh 120] ¼1976½ 2 ,l lh lh 1] ¼1987½ 2 ,l lh lh 179 rFkk ¼2007½ 2 ,l lh lh 181 fufnZ"VA ¼1985½ 3 ,l lh lh 398 foosfprA
¼3½ fof/k dk fuoZpu && dk fu;e && ikB vkSj lanHkZ ij fuHkZj djrk gS && fdlh dh Hkh mis{kk ugha dh tk ldrh && nksuksa egRoiw.kZ gSa && lcls vPNk fuoZpu og gS tks ewyikB&fo"k;d fuoZpu dks izklafxd ds vuwdwy cukrk gSA
U;k- lqtkW; ikWy ¼foLkEer½ &&
vfHkfu/kkZfjr % fof/k ds fuoZpu dk Lof.kZe fu;e gS] fd fuoZpu ikB vkSj lanHkZ ij fuHkZj djrk gS fdlh dh Hkh mis{kk ugha dh tk ldrhA nksuksa gh egRoiw.kZ gSA lcls vPNk fuoZpu og gS tks ewyikB&&fo"k;d fuoZpu dks izklafxd ds vuqdwy cukrk gSA ¼1987½ 1 ,l lh 424 fufnZ"VA
flfoy lsok ¼isU'ku½ fu;e] 1976 ¼e-iz-½ && fu-8¼1½] ¼2½ RkFkk ¼3½ && Hkz"Vkpkj fuokj.k vf/kfu;e] 1988 && /kkjk 7 mica/k ds v/khu fl)nks"k Bgjk;k x;k lsok fuoZŸk lsod && lquokbZ dk volj iznku fd, fcuk && D;k isa'ku jksdh tk ldrh gS && uSlfxZd U;k; dk fla)kr && dk ykxw gksuk && fu;e 8¼2½ vfHkO;Dr :i ls vioftZr ugha djrk && fu;e 8¼3½ ds v/khu && uSlfxZd U;k; dk fla)kr && dk ykxw gksuk && fu;e 8¼2½ vfHkO;Dr :i ls vioftZr ugha djrk && fu;e 8¼3½ ds v/khu && uSlfxZd U;k; dk fl)kar vkKkid :i esa varfyf[kr gS && ,sls lsod dks lquokbZ dks volj iznku fd;k tkuk && visf{kr ugha && l{ke izkf/kdkjh dks ,sls fl)nks"k laca/kh fu.kZ; dks /;ku esa j[krs gq, fu.kZ; fy, tkus dh vko';drk gSA
U;k- lqtks; ikWy&&
vfHkfu/kkZfjr % esjh jk; esa fu;e 8 dk mifu;e ¼2½ uSlfxZd U;k; ds fl)kar dk ykxw gksuk vfHkO;Dr :i ls vioftZr ugha djrkA mifu;e ¼3½] tSlk fd mfYyf[kr gS] lquokbZ ds volj dk mica/k djrk gS tc l{ke izkf/kdkjh isa'kuj dk xaHkhj vopkj dk izFken`"V~;k nks"kh gksus dk fopkj djrk gSA mifu;e ¼3½ es] uSlfxZd U;k; dk fl)kar vkKkid :i ls vrafyf[kr gS] tcfd mifu;e ¼2½ esa ;g micaf/kr gS fd ,sls fl)nks"k ds laca/k esa U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; dks /;ku esa j[krs gq, dk;Zokgh dh tk,xhA mifu;e ¼2½ esa ftl jhfr esa 'kCnksa dks O;Dr fd;k x;k gS] esjh lqfopkfjr jk; esa ;g uSlfxZd U;k; ds fl)kar dks foof{kr :Ik ls vioftZr djrk gSA
esjh lqfopkfjr jk; es] u rks flfoy lsok ¼oxhZdj.k] fu;a=.k vkSj vihy½ fu;eksa ds fu;e 19 esa vkSj u gh fu;e 8 ds mifu;e ¼2½ esa] uSlfxZd U;k; dk fl)kar i<+k tk ldrk gSA okLro es] mlh dkj.k ls mi;qZDr nksuksa mica/kks esa foof{kr rkSj ij vioftZr gSA l{ke izkf/kdkjh ds fu.kZ; dk ,dek= vk/kkj nks"kh ds vkpj.k@vijk/k ls mRiUu fl)nks"k ds fu.kZ; ij fuHkZj djsxkA
mi;qZDr fo'ys"k.k dh n`f"V ls] iz'u Øekad 1 ds laca/k esa esjh jk; gS fd fu;e 8 ds mifu;e ¼1½ ds v/khu fu.kZ; ysus ls iwoZ lsok fuo`Ÿk ljdkjh lsod dks lquokbZ dk volj iznku djuk visf{kr ugha gS vkSj l{ke izkf/kdkjh dks ,sls fl}nks"k ds laca/k esa U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; dks /;ku esa j[krs gq, fUk.kZ; ysus dh vko';drk gSA tc fu;e ¼2½ uSlfxZd U;k; ds fl)akr dks foof{kr :i ls vioftZr djrk gS] ;g U;k;ky; vkKkid dkuwuh izkf/kdkj dh voKk dj uSLkfxZd U;k; ls lac/k j[kus ds mica/k ugha i<+ ldrkA ¼1970½ 2 ,l lh lh 458] ¼1978½ 1 ,l lh lh 248] ¼1994½ 5 ,l lh lh 267 rFkk ¼2010½ 13 ,l lh lh 255 vuqlfjrA ¼1976½ 3 ,l lh lh 190 fufnZ"VA ¼1985½ 3 ,l lh lh 398 foosfprA
Ckgqer jk; &&
cgqer jk; dh n`f"V esa] ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k tkrk gS fd flfoy lsok isa'ku fu;e 1976 ds fu;e 8¼2½ ds v/khu jksdus dk vkns'k ikfjr djus ds iwoZ lquokbZ dk volj iznku fd;k tkuk visf{kr gS vkSj nkÅjke egs'oj fo- e-iz- jkT; rFkk ,d vU; dk fu.kZ; tSlk fd 2017 ¼1½ ,e ih ,y ts esa izdkf'kr lgh & gh fofuf'pr fd;k x;k gSa 2017 ¼1½ ,e ih ,y ts 640 vfHkiq"VA
Gupta, C.J. -- 1. The matter has been placed before this Bench in view of the reference made by the learned Single Judge of this Court doubting the correctness of an order passed by Single Bench of this Court in the case of Dau Ram Maheshwar v. State of M.P. and another, reported as [2017(1) MPLJ 640]. The learned Single Bench has framed the following questions :-
“(I) Whether a show cause notice/opportunity of hearing is required to be given to the Retired Government Servant who is convicted of a serious crime by the Court of law?
(II) Whether the view taken in Dau Ram Maheshwar’s case (supra), is correct in view of rule 8 of the Pension Rules?
2. The facts as are necessary for examining the question posed are that the Petitioner was convicted in a criminal case under section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The petitioner filed an appeal against his conviction which is pending before this Court, wherein there is order of suspension of sentence. The petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.12.2004 and was granted anticipatory pension on 31.3.2005 by the Collector. The entire pension has been withheld under rule 8 of the Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the “Pension Rules” for short) in view of the conviction of the petitioner in the criminal case without giving any notice and opportunity of hearing. The impugned order of stoppage of pension has been passed on 15.3.2010. The ground of challenge in the writ petition is that pension could not be stopped without giving notice or opportunity of hearing.
3. On behalf of the State it is stated that the pension has been stopped after consultation of the Public Service Commission and the approval from the Council of Ministers. It is denied that there is any violation of principles of natural justice as the pension has been stopped in terms of rule 8 (1) of the Pension Rules, 1976. Rule 8 of the said Rules reads 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 with to make against the proposal; and (b) take into consideration the representation, if any, submitted by the pensioner under clause (a).
(4) where the authority competent to pass an order under sub-rule (1) is the Governor, the State Public Service Commission shall be consulted before the order is passed.
(5) An appeal against an order under sub-rule (1), passed by any authority
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.