SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(MP) 25467

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Rajaram Raje – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
WP 16344/2019



Advocates:
,Advocate General

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA ON THE 4 th OF SEPTEMBER, 2023 WRIT PETITION No. 16344 of 2019 BETWEEN:-

RAJARAM RAJE S/O LATE KHEMCHAND RAJE, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCCUPATION: EX LIBRARIAN INDIRA GANDHI GOVT. ENGINEERING COLLEGE SAGAR R/O RAJBHAWAN PRABHAKAR NAGAR MAKRONIYA, DISTRICT SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI PRAHLAD CHOUDHARY - ADVOCATE )

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THR.

THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TECHNICAL EDUCATION SKILL DEVELOPMENT EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT MANTRALAYA VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. DEPUTY SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF MP TECHNICAL EDUCATION SKILL DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT MANTRALAYA BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. PRINCIPAL GOVT. INDIRA GANDHI ENGINEERING COLLEGE SAGAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI K. S. BAGHEL – GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs :-

(i) That, this Hon’ble Court may kind enough to quash and set aside the impugned order (Annexure-P/1) passed by the respondent No.2 precluding the petitioner from payment of his pension, gratuity and other pensionary benefits and also recovery of a huge amount and further be pleased to direct the respondents to release the pension, gratuity and other pensionary benefits of the petitioner, in the interest of justice.

(ii) That, this Hon’ble Court be further pleased to stop the respondents from recovery of Rs.4,95,292/- from the petitioner. Further, the respondents be directed to produce all relevant records, on the basis of which, such a harsh punishment is imposed and the petitioner has been debarred from payment of his pension qua livelihood at the fag end of his life and to survive with his family.

(iii) That, this Hon’ble Court be kind enough to grant such other relief / reliefs to the petitioner as deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is an Ex-

librarian and was posted in Government Indira Gandhi Engineering College, Sagar. In the year 2009 one FIR was lodged against the petitioner with regard to embezzlement of

3960 books worth Rs.8 lacs. A departmental enquiry was conducted and in the said enquiry the allegations were found baseless. Thereafter, Principal Secretary, Technical Education and Skill Development sought opinion from the Director, Technical Education for withdrawal of criminal case which was pending against the petitioner. However, he did not respond and got the concerned file lost from the directorate as a result criminal case which was pending before the Court could not be withdrawn and ultimately, the petitioner suffered conviction of 5 years RI with fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 409 of IPC. Against the judgment of conviction, the petitioner preferred criminal appeal no. 3911/16 and his sentence has been suspended. Consequently, the petitioner was terminated from service vide order dated 25.6.2018 as a result he has been precluded from the payment of pensionary benefits, gratuity, leave encashment etc. The departmental appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed by the impugned order. It is submitted that pension is a property and the petitioner is entitled to receive the same and the same cannot be withdrawn by an executive order. It is further submitted that punishment of a delinquent employee must commensurate with the gravity of misconduct. The respondents have acted in violation of service jurisprudence and accordingly, it is prayed that gratuity, leave encashment, pension etc. be paid.

3. Per contra, the petition is vehemently opposed by counsel for the State. It is submitted that by judgment dated 15.10.2016 passed by 5th Sessions Judge, Sagar in ST No.31/10 the petitioner has been c

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top