KARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner was working as Sub Divisional Officer in the office of respondent No. 2 in the year 2000. Some recovery was ordered against him on the basis of departmental proceedings. It is alleged that during the course of recovery an amount of Rs. 13,494.25.00 paise was recovered excess from the petitioner which is to be refunded. The petitioner retired on 31.8.2005 on attaining the age of superannuation. Before the retirement, a charge sheet dated 7.2.2005 was served upon him. The pensionary benefits were released after issuance of PPO bearing No. 3819 dated 18.12.2006 in compliance of order dated 19.12.2006 passed by this Court in C.W.P. No. 19853 of 2005.

(2.) In so far as the claim by the petitioner, for refund of the amount recovered from him is concerned in para No. 5, it is admitted that this amount was recovered in excess from the petitioner and is refundable to him. It is, however, stated that in view of the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, the amount has been withheld and other retiral benefits have also been withheld. According to the reply filed by the respondent, the petitioner was found involved in embezzlement of the huge revenue amounting to Rs. 43,39,838.00 and a criminal case in this regard has also been registered against him on account of registration of a criminal case and initiation of disciplinary proceedings. The other retiral benefits have also not been paid. Admittedly, charge sheet was issued before the retirement of the petitioner but the disciplinary proceedings could not be completed.

(3.) Mr. Gupta was directed to produce the Rules governing the conditions of service and punishment of the employees of the Nigam. He was also asked to produce copy of the Regulations namely "Haryana State Electricity Board Employees (Punishment and Appeal) Regulation, 1990 as are applicable to the employees of the Board (now Nigam). Rule 4 of the Regulations deals with the penalties both minor and major whereas Regulation 5 deals with withholding of emoluments and Regulation 6 deals with the Authority to institute proceedings and inflict penalties whereas Regulation 7 deals with procedure for imposing major penalty. There is no Rule which permit, the respondent to continue disciplinary proceedings after the retirement. It is settled law that the disciplinary proceedings cannot be continued after the retirement unless Rule permit so. No such Rule or a regulation permitting continuance of disciplinary proceedings has been brought to my notice. The Honourable Supreme Court in Bhagirathi Jena Vs. Board of Directors, O.S.F.C. and others, 1999(2) S.C.T. 651 : (1999)3 SCC 666 has held as under:-