STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. KRISHNA PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) We have heard learned counsel on both sides. This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the High Court of Allahabad, made on December 2, 1993 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29951 of 1993. The admitted position is that before departmental enquiry was initiated against the respondent for embezzlement of Rs. 2,47,779/-, on his attaining the age of superannuation on March 31, 1987, he was allowed to retire from service. The departmental proceedings thereafter were initiated against him. F.I.R. was lodged and investigation is stated to be in progress. No such rule to continue the proceedings after retirement as is in vogue in some State or Central Service Pension Rules, is in operation. So the action of departmental proceedings cannot be continued. There would be no impediment to have the investigation into the offences continued. However, when pension was not paid to him it came to be challenged in the High Court in the above writ petition which the High Court has allowed it and has directed to pay the pension. Thus this appeal by special leave.

(3.) The only provision brought to our notice is Rule 351-A which reads as under:-