RAMLAL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Central issue falling for consideration would be whether "gratuity payable" to retired government servant, which is "property" within the meaning of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India can be withheld on the ground of pendency of criminal case

(2.) The petitioner superannuated from the post of Assistant Grade-II on 31.7.2012 from the establishment of the Collector (Land Record), Dhamtari. He is facing trial for an offence under Sections 7 read with Section 13 (1) (d) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as "PC Act") registered on 9.11.2009. Upon retirement, the petitioner was not paid service benefits namely gratuity, pension, leave encashment and balance salary against his suspension. He filed writ petition being W.P.(S) No.3420 of 2013 (Ramlal Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), in which this Court directed the State/respondents to consider the representation and take a decision of payment of retiral benefits to the petitioner on petitioner's representation, respondent No.3 herein by order dated 16.1.2014 (Annexure P/1) held that the petitioner is entitled for anticipatory pension, but he is not entitled for other retiral benefits including gratuity. Against which, this writ petition has been filed stating inter-alia that withholding of gratuity, leave encashment and salary against suspension is impermissible in law and as such, a writ of mandamus be issued to the respondents for payment of gratuity, leave encashment and other admissible amount.

(3.) Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that by virtue of sub-rule (4) of Rule 9 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "Pension Rules"), a government servant who has retired on attaining the age of superannuation and against whom judicial proceedings are instituted or pending consideration, a provisional pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity as provided in rule 64 shall be sanctioned. He would further submit that Rule 64 (1) (a) of the Pension Rules provides for payment of provisional pension and 50% of gratuity, taking into consideration the gravity of charges levelled against such Government servant and as such, non-payment of gratuity, leave encashment and part of salary is unsustainable and bad in law as the order passed by the respondent No.3 is blissfully silent with regard to gratuity, leave encashment and salary against suspension, therefore, the impugned order be set aside and appropriate writ(s)/direction be issued for making payment of aforestated due.