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

2004 Supreme(Kar) 562

MANJULA CHELLUR, S.R.NAYAK
N. K. SUPARNA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates:
Basavaraj Kareddy, P.A.Kulkarni

S. R. NAYAK, J.

( 1 ) WHAT falls for decision-making in this writ petition is the interpretation of the words "after the conclusion of departmental or judicial proceedings occurring in clause (b) of Sub-rule (1) of Rule 69 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (for short 'the Rules' ).

( 2 ) THE petitioner while serving as Accounts Officer in Telecom Department retired on attaining the age of superannuation on the afternoon of 31st January, 2002. Even before that date, in July 1993, the petitioner was trapped in criminal case and he was prosecuted by the special CBI Court Bangalore in C. C. No. 127 of 1994. The special Court after trial convicted the petitioner and he was sentenced to undergo R. I. for three years on each count by its judgment and order dated 31. 12. 2001. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 78 of 2002 to this Court. The said appeal is admitted and pending. It is stated that the sentence is suspended by this Court.

( 3 ) AFTER the conviction of the petitioner by the CBI Court, the President of India invoking his power under Rule 9 (1) of the Rules, has forfeited the pension and gratuity paya










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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top