DHIRENDRA KUMAR DUBEY Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition, under Art. 226, of the Constitution of India has been filed being aggrieved of the order dated 17/12/2015 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent no. 3, whereby services of the petitioner have been terminated on account of conviction in Criminal Case No. 07/2013 vide judgment dated 27/5/2015 for the offences punishable under sections 7, 13(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and 120B of the IPC and sentence of 1 year's R.I. with fine of Rs. 1,000.00 with default stipulation for each offence.

(2.) Brief facts leading to filing of this case are explicated thus:

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire action of the respondents in dismissing the services of the petitioner after his superannuation and withholding of retiral dues is illegal and arbitrary. It is submitted that Rule 9(1) of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (for brevity "the Rules of 1976") empowers and gives right only to His Excellency the Governor to withhold and withdraw the pension permanently. No order with regard to dismissal can be passed under the Rules of 1976. It is further submitted that since the petitioner superannuated on 31/10/2015, by no stretch of imagination his services could have been terminated vide order dated 17/12/2015 (Annexure P/1), much less under the Rules of 1976. Even otherwise, before issuing such termination order, no show-cause notice was ever served upon the petitioner. He further submitted that the appeal is still pending consideration, therefore conviction by the trial Court cannot be treated to have attained finality and the impugned order based thereupon cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. Accordingly, it is prayed that the impugned order may be set aside and retiral dues may be directed to be released in favour of the petitioner.