[2025:RJ-JD:47971]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17418/2018 Bhanwar Singh S/o Shri Ganpat Singh, Aged About 65 Years, By Caste Rajput, R/o Shiv Garden, Near Jubilee Petrol Pump, Revdar, District Sirohi.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Chief Engineer, (Admn.)

Public Health Engineering Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

2. The Addl. Chief Engineer (Rural), Public Health Engineering Department, Jodhpur.

3. The Superintendent Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Circle, Sirohi.

4. The Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Abu Road, Distt. Sirohi.

5. The Assistant Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Sub Division Revdar, District Sirohi.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Arora For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mayank Vyas HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

06/11/2025

1. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition, seeking issuance of appropriate directions to the respondents for the release of his entire retiral dues, including regular pension, the differential amount between regular and provisional pension, gratuity, commutation of pension, and leave encashment, together with consequential interest thereon. The petitioner has further impugned the communication dated 03.10.2018, contending that the same is arbitrary, manifestly erroneous, and violative of his vested rights under the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996.

2. Briefly stated, the petitioner served as Revenue Munshi in the Office of the Revenue Sub-Division, Reodar, under the respondent department. During his tenure, certain financial discrepancies were alleged to have occurred, prompting the department to conduct a special audit inquiry for the period March 1987 to June 2002. The inquiry allegedly revealed an embezzlement of ₹1,46,392/-, purportedly attributable to the petitioner.

2.1. Thereafter, the Assistant Engineer directed the petitioner to deposit the said amount, failing which criminal proceedings were threatened. To avert unnecessary litigation, the petitioner complied and deposited the entire sum.

2.2. Despite such compliance, a memorandum of charges under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958, was issued to the petitioner in 2013, nearly a decade after the alleged incident. The petitioner filed his reply promptly, denying the allegations and highlighting the inordinate delay. Notwithstanding the submission, the disciplinary proceedings were never pursued further.

2.3. The petitioner subsequently retired, yet his pensionary and retiral benefits were not fully released, as reflected in his Pension Payment Order (PPO). Multiple representations and a formal notice demanding justice were submitted to the respondents, all of which were received but remained unheeded.

2.4. In response, the department furnished para-wise comments, asserting that the inquiry had concluded and a minor penalty of withholding one annual grade increment without cumulative effect had been imposed. However, the petitioner was never communicated the order of punishment. Further, despite having deposited ₹1,46,392/-, the department erroneously demanded the same amount again. The petitioner was also not directed to submit requisite documents, including D.C. Roll or photocopies necessary for pension finalization. The impugned reply dated 03.10.2018 is, therefore, manifestly flawed and unsustainable in law. Hence, the instant Writ Petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that although certain payments toward retiral benefits and regular pension were made during the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner continues to be deprived of:

i) Payment of gratuity, along with admissible interest for inordinate delay;

ii) Revision of basic pension to ₹16,150/- per month instead of ₹15,690/- per month; and iii) Interest at the rate of 9% per annum under Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 199