BALDEO RAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the parties.

(2.) The Petitioner has challenged the order contained in Annexure-11 dated 16.1.2004, issued by the Secretary-cum-Commissioner, Department of Transport, Government of Bihar by which 10% of his pension has been deducted under Rule 139 of the Bihar Pension Rules.

(3.) The facts of the case are that the Petitioner was posted as District Transport Officer at the relevant time i.e. in the year 1995. On 7.1.1995 non-gazetted officers went on indefinite strike and it has been pleaded on behalf of the Petitioner that there was no token receipts available in the office, as such he asked the District Magistrate to supply him the Performa of tax receipts by a letter dated 7.1.1995. On 29.4.1995, a show cause was issued to the Petitioner alleging that he had misappropriated Rs. 2,00,000/-. On 2.8.1995 second show cause was issued to the Petitioner regarding the same facts. It is not clear from the averments made in the writ application whether the Petitioner responded to the show cause issued to him on 29.7.1995 and 2.8.1995. In any event no order was passed by the authorities in question. The Petitioner retired on 30.6.1998. On 14.7.2000, the Petitioner was again issued a show cause notice as to why 10% of his pension be not deducted in view of the allegations which had been levelled against him. The Petitioner came to this Court and filed CWJC No. 5340 of 2002 which was disposed of on 12.9.2002 giving a direction to the Petitioner to file a show cause. The Petitioner thereafter filed a show cause which is contained in Annexure-8 of the writ application. As usual after the show cause was filed no order was passed by the authorities and the Petitioner had to file contempt application (M.J.C. No. 1774 of 2003 disposed of on 12.8.2009) and it was during the contempt application that the order dated 24.1.2004 was passed.