Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 746 (RAJ)

Ram Sahai Sharma v. State of Rajasthan

2000-07-03

SHIV KUMAR SHARMA

body2000
JUDGMENT 1. - The petitioner, an Executive Engineer, upon attaining the age of superannuation was retired on January 31, 1984. Before his retirement the petitioner was facing two disciplinary proceedings under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1958 (for short the CCA Rules) on the basis of the charge sheets dated December 18, 1982 and January 27, 1984. Enquiries based on the aforesaid charge sheets stood concluded respectively on March 25, 1995 and July 31,1995. Penalty of stoppage of 10% of pension for a period of five years was imposed upon the petitioner in each enquiry. The petitioner has assailed these orders of penalties in the instant writ petition, with a further prayer to award him all the arrears of pension, gratuity and other retrial benefits with interest and costs. 2. Respondents contested the writ petition by filing reply. 3. I have reflected over the rival submissions and carefully scanned the record. 4. Rule 170 of the Rajasthan Service Rules was read over before me by learned counsel for the petitioner and it was canvassed that in both the orders the only finding against the petitioner is that he was guilty of supervisory negligence therefore no penalty could be imposed upon him in view of the rider contained in Rule 170, since for invoking the said Rules it was to be established that the Government had suffered any pecuniary loss. On a close scrutiny of the impugned orders it is difficult to agree with the learned counsel. I do not find any justification to interfere with the orders impugned. But even if these orders stand, the period of five years of withholding of 20% pension had come to an end on January 31, 1989 as the petitioner having already retired on January 31, 1984. Therefore the respondents could not have retained the outstanding retrial benefits of the petitioner. Act of the respondents in withholding the outstanding retrial benefits of the petitioner is violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 5. In view of what I have discussed hereinabove the writ petition stands partly allowed. The respondents are directed to pay to the petitioner all arrears of his pension, gratuity, commutation of pension and other retiral benefits as may be found due within two months from the date of receipt of this order. 5. In view of what I have discussed hereinabove the writ petition stands partly allowed. The respondents are directed to pay to the petitioner all arrears of his pension, gratuity, commutation of pension and other retiral benefits as may be found due within two months from the date of receipt of this order. The petitioner shall also be entitled to interest of 12% per annum on the outstanding amount from August 1, 1995. The petitioner shall also be entitled to costs of this writ petition.Writ Petition Partly Allowed. *******