Post-retirement, pension and gratuity can be permanently withheld upon criminal corruption conviction, even if sentence suspended but conviction not stayed; no fresh enquiry required, public interest prevails over appeal pendency.

ORDER 

PER: JUSTICE B.K. SHRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (J)

This OA has been filed on 22.12.2022 for quashment of the impugned order dated 23.06.2022 (Annexure – A1) by which the 100 per cent of monthly pension and the remaining amount of gratuity of the applicant has been withheld on permanent basis. The reliefs claimed in para 8 of the OA are as under:

“1. Quash Annexure A-1 order and direct the respondents to continue to disburse to the applicant, the monthly pension due to him and other attendant benefits.

2. Such other relief as may be prayed for and this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit to grant.

3. Grant the cost of this Original Application.”

2. Looking to the pleadings of both parties and the documents, the following facts are admitted facts in this case:-

a) The applicant had retired from the post of Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise on 31.05.2011.

b) During the period from 08.02.2008 to 03.12.2008, the applicant was posted as Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex, Nedumbassery, Cochin.

c) In relation to the aforesaid period, a criminal case/FIR was registered against the applicant on 28.12.2012. After investigation the charge sheet was filed on 20.01.2014 and the Court framed the charges against the applicant on 21.11.2016. On 04.05.2017 the Special Court decided the CC No. 44/2014 and convicted the applicant for the offence under Section 120B of I.P.C read with Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(a), 13(1)(d) and 14(b) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

d) The Trial Court sentenced to the applicant to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay fine of Rs. 15 lakhs each in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(a) and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay fine of Rs. 15 lakhs in each under Section 120 B read with 13(2), 13(1) of Prevention of Corruption Act.

e) The applicant preferred the Criminal Appeal No. 468/2017 before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam Bench and by order dated 02.06.2017 the Hon’ble High Court suspended the sentence but did not suspend the conviction.

f) A notice was issued to the applicant on 10.08.2020. Thereafter, the applicant submitted the reply to the notice in August 2020 (Annexure – A2). Thereafter, the matter was forwarded to the UPSC for seeking advice on 29.09.2021. The advice (Annexure – A3) was received on 31.12.2021. Vide letter dated 13.01.2022 (Annexure – A4) the advice was communicated to the applicant for seeking his response.

g) The applicant did not submit the reply of the aforesaid notice and filed OA No. 83/2022 before this Tribunal. On 16.02.2022, the Tribunal permitted to the applicant to withdraw the OA with liberty to file representation before the respondents as specified in the memorandum dated 13.01.2022. It was also mentioned by the Tribunal that the said representation will be filed within 10 days and the appropriate competent authority will decide the aforesaid representation.

h) In compliance with the aforesaid order of C.A.T (Annexure – A5), the applicant submitted the representation on 18.02.2022 (Annexure – A6). After consideration of the aforesaid representation, the impugned order (Annexure – A1) was passed on 23.06.2022.

3. In the impugned order, the following punishment has been awarded in para 5.

“And therefore, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Disciplinary Authority has