DAGDULAL SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was working on Group 'd' post in the Postal Department. On attaining the age of superannuation he was retired w. e. f. 1-4-1995 and was getting pension. A letter dated 17-11-1999 was issued to him by the third respondent informing him that as he is undergoing sentence of 7 years imprisonment for offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, for the present he can not be paid pension. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner approached to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur (for short 'the Tribunal') in O. A. No. 774/2000. The Tribunal by order dated 15-7-2002 dismissed the said O. A. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this petition.

(2.) THE petitioner contends that the said letter by which his pension is withheld is violative of Rule 8 (1) (b) and (2) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (Rules for short) as the said letter does not indicate as to whether the decision to withhold his pension is taken considering as to withhold his full or part of the pension as also whether it is to be withheld permanently or for a specified period. It also does not show that the action is taken in the light of the judgment of the Court relating to such conviction. The petitioner relying on the judgments of the Supreme Court passed in the case of State of Punjab v. K. R. Erry, , AIR1973 SC 834 , 1973 Lablc440 , (1973 )I LLJ33 SC , (1973 )1 SCC120 , [1973 ]2 SCR405 , 1973 (5 )UJ370 (SC ) and in the State of Punjab v. Iqbal Singh, , AIR1976 SC 667 , 1976 Lablc474 , (1976 )II LLJ377 SC , (1976 )2 SCC1 , [1976 ]3 SCR360 , 1976 (8 )UJ260 (SC ) contends that he should have been afforded opportunity of hearing before issuance of such order of withholding of his pension which has civil consequences.

(3.) THE respondents contend that the petitioner having found to be convicted of offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, they have rightly withheld his pension.