APHC010680072025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3460]

AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

THURSDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 35265/2025 Between:

Ch RamakotiLingeswara Rao ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. K SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR SERVICES I The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY WRIT PETITION NO: 35265 OF 2025 ORDER:-

The present Writ Petition is filed questioning the action of the Respondents in not releasing the gratuity and earned leave contrary to the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980,as illegal and arbitrary.

2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as follows:

The Petitioner had retired from service as Chief Engineer from the Respondent No. 3 Corporation on attaining the age of superannuation on 28.02.2022. While in service, a criminal case was registered against the Petitioner for the offense punishable under Section 13 (2) r/w Section 13 (1) (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act on the allegation of having assets disproportionate to the known source of income. After investigation, a charge sheet has been filed, which was taken cognizance of by the concerned Court and numbered as C.C.No.35 of 2023, and the said case is pending for trial. While so, the present Writ Petition is filed for grant of gratuity and earned leave.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner while relying on the Rule 9 of the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980, which provides for withholding of pensionary benefits and gratuity only in the event of any loss caused to the Respondent Corporation, contends that in the present case as there is no loss caused to the Respondent Corporation, the Petitioner would be entitled to gratuity and pension.

4. Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation would submit that the proviso to Rule 9 of the A.P. Revised Pension Rules, 1980, empowers the competent authority to withhold or withdraw pension or gratuity, either in whole or in part, where an employee is found guilty or upon conviction in a court of law regarding the offenses of grave charges of misappropriation, bribery, bigamy, corruption, etc. He would further submit that once gratuity is disbursed, the power of withholding gratuity as contemplated under the proviso to Rule 9 cannot be exercised, and such a situation is not the intent or understanding of the said proviso.

5. Heard the respective counsel.

6. The provision to Rule 9 of the AP Revised Pension Rules, 1980, reads as under:

“9. Right of Government to withhold or withdraw pension :-

(1) The Government reserves to themselves the right of withholding a pension or gratuity, or both, either in full or in part, or withdrawing a pension in full or in part, whether permanently or for a specific period and of ordering recovery from a pension or gratuity of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused, to the Government and to the local authority if, in any departmental or judicial proceedings the pensioner is found guilty of grave misconduct or negligence during the period of his service, including service rendered upon re-employment after retirement:

Provided that the Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission shall be consulted before any final orders are passed. 1 [“However, consultation with Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission is not necessary, when the pensioner is found guilty in any judicial proceedings”.

Provided further that a part of pension is withheld or withdrawn, the amount of such pension shall not be reduced below the limit specified in sub-rule (5) of Rule 45.

“Provided also that the penalty of withholding of entire pension or gratuity or both may be imposed against the retired Government servant upon being found guilty or upon conviction in a court of law for the offences of grave charges namely proved cases of misappropriation, b