GEORGE Vs. TAHSILDAR COCHIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was a Village Officer. He retired from service on superannuation on 30-4-1991. On 29-4-1991, he, along with four others, was placed under suspension on the allegation that they demanded Rs.400/- from one Mr. Lineshah, S/o. Pushkaran for taking steps 10 conduct 'Pokku Varavu'. Petitioner was not given his retirement benefits. So, he has moved this Original Petition inter alia praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents to sanction and disburse provisional pension pending criminal prosecution and also the gratuity amount due to him.

(2.) Along with the Original petition, petitioner moved C.M.P. 15676/1991. On 21-2-1992, this Court ordered:

(3.) On behalf of respondents, statement dated 19-3-1992 has been filed. The contention taken therein is to the following effect.-Petitioner was involved in a criminal case resulting from an attempt of collecting illegal gratification. He is being proceeded against under the Prevention of Corruption Act. As provided in R.3-A of Part III K.S.R., petitioner is entitled only to provisional pension until the proceedings initiated are finalised. R.3-A provides that no Death cum Retirement Gratuity shall be paid to a delinquent officer until the conclusion of such proceeding and issue of final orders thereon. In this view, petitioner has not yet become entitled to Death cum Retirement Gratuity. There is no exception to R.3-A. The moment criminal proceeding or departmental proceeding is initiated, the bar under R.3A comes into operation. So, petitioner is not entitled to claim Death-Cum Retirement Gratuity. Nor is he entitled to interest on that amount.