SITARAMYADAVA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) By the Presidential Order dated 5/05/1987, both pension and, DCRG have been withheld. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that so far as gratuity is concerned, the matter stands covered by this court's decision in D. V. Kapoorv. Union of India. That case turned on the interpretation of Rule 9 of the central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1972. In paragraph 10 of the judgment after referring to the rule, this court pointed out that the right to gratuity being a statutory right could be taken away by a valid rule only and since Rule 9 did not empower the withholding of gratuity and no other rule was pointed out which permitted. the withholding of gratuity, the order withholding gratuity could not be sustained. We enquired of Mr Tuisi, learned ASG, if he was in a position to point out any rule which entitled the President to withhold DCRG. He was not able to do so. It, therefore, prima facie appearsthat the contention urged by counsel in regard to gratuity is well founded.

(3.) We, therefore, by this interim order direct the release of DCRG to the petitioner on the petitioner giving an undertaking to this court to refund the same in the event this court so directs. Printing dispensed with Appeal to be heard on present papers. Additional papers, if any, to be filed within four weeks from today by the petitioner and three weeks thereafter by the respondents. If the pleadings are closed, the matter may be placed for final hearing, since a short question is involved touching the petitioner's right to pension and gratuity.