Pensionary benefits cannot be withheld without ongoing proceedings against the employee at the time of retirement.

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

The petitioners-State Authorities are before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the order dated 06.02.2025 in Application No.5159/2024 passed by the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereunder withholding of DCRG and pensionary benefits under AG's communication dated 12.12.2023 is quashed with a direction to the petitioners to release the same and to pay interest as per the recent Government Circulars.

2. Heard Sri Ravindranath, learned Additional Government Advocate for the petitioners-State authorities and Sri Shantharaju, learned counsel for caveator/respondent No.1 and perused the entire writ petition papers.

3. Learned Additional Government Advocate would submit that respondent No.1 retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.09.2023. It is submitted that before his retirement, on 04.05.2018, FIR came to be registered against respondent No.1 for the offences of possessing disproportionate assets. Respondent No.1 filed Writ Petition No.105219/2023 , challenging the said FIR and this Court by order dated 24.08.2023 stayed the further proceedings in pursuance to the said FIR. Learned AGA would submit that the Tribunal could not have quashed the communication withholding of DCRG and pensionary benefits of respondent No.1, since FIR was registered against respondent No.1 and the same was pending as on the date of his retirement. Since investigation in pursuance to FIR was pending, learned AGA would submit that the petitioner- Government was justified in withholding the DCRG and other pensionary benefits. Thus, learned AGA prays for allowing the writ petition by setting aside the order passed by the Tribunal.

4. On the other hand, Sri Shantharaju, learned counsel appearing for the Caveator-respondent No.1 would submit that no enquiry or judicial proceedings were pending against respondent No.1 as on the date of his superannuation on 30.09.2023. Since no enquiry or judicial proceedings were pending, the petitioners had no authority or jurisdiction to withhold the DCRG or pensionary benefits of respondent No.1.

Thus, learned counsel would submit that the Tribunal is justified in directing release of pension and pensionary benefits including DCRG. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

5. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the entire writ petition papers, we are of the view that the petitioners-State authorities have not made out any ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and on the other hand, writ petition requires to be dismissed on cost.

6. Rule 214 of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules (KCSRs) empowers the Government, the right of either withholding or withdrawing a pension or part thereof, either permanently or for a specified period under the circumstances enumerated therein. It would also empower the State Government, the right of ordering recovery from a pension, the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to the Government. Further, if in any departmental or judicial proceedings, the pensioner is found guilty of grave negligence during the period of his service, the pension or pensionary benefits could be withheld. For withholding pension or pensionary benefits or DCRG, as on the date of superannuation or date of retirement of the government servant, the departmental enquiry or judicial proceedings shall be pending. Sub-rule (6) of Rule 214 of KCSRs reads as follows:

"(6) For the purpose of this rule.--

(a) departmental proceedings shall be deemed to be instituted on the date on which the sta