RPS PANWAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein had joined the Department of Telecommunications (for short, 'DOT') as Engineering Supervisor on 19.1.1968 and got promotions from time to time. By the year 1999, he had risen to the rank of ITS Group -A (SAG Level) as GM (Telephones) and was posted at Moradabad. In July 2003, he was transferred as GM (Telephones) to Muzaffarnagar, where on 18.9.2003 he was arrested by the CBI. It was on the basis of FIR registered by the CBI on 12.9.2003 on the allegation of disproportionate assets and his failure to intimate the same to the authorities. Since his detention exceeding 48 hours, order was passed on 23.9.2003 under Rule 10(2) of the CCS (CCA) R., 1965 placing him under deemed suspension with effect from 18.9.2003, i.e. the date of his arrest. Though the petitioner was granted bail after a period of two months, i.e. on 18.11.2003, his suspension continued as it was extended from time to time.

(2.) THE petitioner was also served with the charge sheet dated 25.10.2004 under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) R.. This was followed by another charge sheet dated 13.12.2004 under Rule 16 for minor penalty proceedings in which, after eliciting his reply, displeasure was conveyed. However, insofar as suspension of the petitioner is concerned, his employer kept on extending the same from time to time. Lastly on 15.2.2006, the suspension was extended by 180 days, though the petitioner was attaining the age of superannuation on 30.4.2006. This was followed by letter dated 13.4.2006 stating that the petitioner would continue under suspension even after his retirement. Notwithstanding this, by another order dated 28.4.2006 he was permitted to retire on 30.4.2006. The said Office Memorandum dated 28.4.2006 reads as under:

(3.) IT is not in dispute that the aforesaid two charge sheets were served upon the petitioner after his retirement/superannuation, which occurred on 30.4.2006. As per Rule 9 of the CCS (Pension) R. (hereinafter referred to as 'Pension R.'), charge sheet can be served against a retired officer also under certain conditions, and one of them being that the event for which the charge sheet is issued should be within four years from the date of issuance of the charge sheet. This Rule also stipulates that if the departmental proceedings are instituted against a Government servant before his retirement or during his reemployment, it shall be deemed that those proceedings are under Rule 9 and shall be continued and concluded by the authority by which they were commenced even after his retirement in the same manner as if the Government servant had continued in service. The Rule also points out that where a Government employee is placed under suspension, then the departmental proceedings shall be deemed to be instituted on the date when he was placed under suspension.