SHRI KALIDASBHAI Vs. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PRASAR BHARATI BROADCASTING CORPORATION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANT states that while working as Programme Executive in the Doordarshan Kendra, was faced with a criminal case filed by the CBI. He was placed under suspension vide order dated 26 -4 -1993 and remained under suspension till the date of his retirement on 31 -1 -1997. The criminal case instituted against him was disposed of in April 2013. His retiral dues were being withheld by respondents due to the CBI case pending against him. In spite of his acquittal in the criminal case, respondents are not releasing applicant's retiral dues. Applicant sent Annexure -A/1 reminder dated 30 -8 -2013 to respondents. Yet no action was taken by respondent for releasing his retiral dues. He was being paid subsistence allowance during the period of suspension, till retirement. Applicant further states that after retirement he was paid provisional pension and 50% of DCRG by respondents. According to him since he was acquitted in the criminal case, his suspension period should be regularised, permitting him to enjoy the benefits of the 5th Pay Commission. It is also contended that during the pendency of the criminal case he was eligible for promotion to the post of ASD, but his case was considered by respondents and the result was kept in sealed cover; the sealed cover is required to be opened and its effect is required to be given to him notionally. The reliefs Applicant seeks in this OA are :

(2.) RESPONDENTS filed reply stating that on acquittal by the CBI Court applicant submitted Annexure -A/1 representation requesting to release his retiral dues. Only the operative part of the judgment was sent by applicant along with Annexure -A/1. On receipt of Annexure -A/1 respondents vide Annexure -R/1 communication requested the CBI to inform whether any decision was taken by the CBI to file appeal against the order of acquittal. As respondents did not get any reply from the CBI, they once again sent reminder as per Annexure -R/2. On 11 -2 -2014 the Superintendent of Police CBI/SPE Division, Gandhinagar sent a copy of the judgment of CBI Court along with Annexure -R/3 covering letter. On 12 -2 -2014 the CBI informed respondents by Annexure -R/4 that the judgment dated 29 -4 -2013 passed by the CBI Court is under legal scrutiny and the intimation regarding filing of appeal could be given later. Applicant was placed under suspension vide Annexure -R/5 order dated 03 -5 -1993. The competent authority of respondents withheld the retiral dues of applicant as the criminal case was pending against him. Applicant is being paid provisional pension and he has already been paid 50% of the DCRG. Respondents state that if the CBI files appeal against the said judgment and if the appeal is admitted, applicant will not be entitled to get his retiral dues during the pendency of that appeal in the criminal case.

(3.) HEARD Mr. M.S. Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Joy Mathew, learned counsel for the respondents. At the time of hearing of the matter Mr. Joy Mathew produced a communication dated 28/31 -3 -2014 from the Superintendent of Police, CBI/SPE Division, Gandhinagar stating that the CBI is not filing any appeal against the order of acquittal in favour of the applicant. The communication reads as follows: