Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 458 (PAT)

Kesh Ranjan Pathak v. State Of Bihar

2003-04-21

RADHA MOHAN PRASAD

body2003
Judgment 1. The petitioner, who retired as Panchayat Sevak from Ronia Panchayat under Khizersarai Block in the district of Gaya on 30.11.1999, is aggrieved as no retiral dues has been paid except the amount of G.RF. and 75% of pension. 2. Despite service of notice long back on 3.2.2003, there has been no response from the Respondents as no counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf. However, it appears that a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner while in service and later a criminal case was also instituted, which is still pending and on that account remaining retiral dues have been kept withheld. 3. I failed to appreciate as to how the entire retiral dues can be kept withheld on account of pendency of the so-called departmental proceeding and the criminal case. Even as per the instruction issued by the Finance Department vide Memo no. PC-11-40-28/74/9144 F dated 22.8.1974 and Memo No. PC-11-40-98/74-1126UF dated 31.10.1974, the validity of which has been upheld by the Division Bench in the case of State of Bihar V/s. Ganga Bishun Mahto, reported in 2001(4) PLJR 435 , payment of 75% of provisional pension is to be made and only 25% of it is to be kept withheld subject to final outcome of such proceeding, but, there is nothing in the said Government Instruction to withhold any other retiral dues, such as, amount of leave encashment, group insurance, G.RF. etc. The word Pension has been defined under Rule 27 of the Bihar Pension Rules and it includes gratuity. Thus, as per the said Government decision withholding of entire gratuity amount is not permissible and the Government can maximum withhold 25% of the amount of gratuity. Under such circumstances, in my opinion, withholding of remaining retiral dues by the Block Development Officer, Khizirsarai is wholly arbitrary and malafide and makes him liable for payment of cost of Rs. 2,000/- from his pocket. 4. Accordingly, writ application is allowed with cost of 2,000/- to be paid by the Block Development Officer, Khizirsarai, Gaya (Respondent no. 4) from his pocket to the petitioner. Respondent no.4 is further directed to pay the remaining retiral dues as aforementioned to the petitioner within one week of the receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which he shall be liable to pay a further cost of Rs. 4) from his pocket to the petitioner. Respondent no.4 is further directed to pay the remaining retiral dues as aforementioned to the petitioner within one week of the receipt/production of a copy of this order, failing which he shall be liable to pay a further cost of Rs. 1,000/- from his pocket to the petitioner and the petitioner will be at liberty to file two pages affidavit for revival and for taking appropriate action.