VAIDHYANATH SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal shall decide W.A.No.1245/2012 & W.A.No.1246/2012, in which similar question of law is involved on similar facts.

(2.) The facts are taken from W.A.No. 1245/2012 for the convenience.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that until and unless a specific order is passed by the Governor for stopping the provisional pension the authorities could not have stopped the pension. The petitioner has placed reliance to Rule 64(1)(b) of the M.P.Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'Pension Rules' for short) in support of his contention.