RAJIV KUMAR AMBASTA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in the present writ application has prayed for the following reliefs:

(2.) The petitioner has retired as Head clerk from the office of the Collector, Begusarai on 31.12.2018. While in service he had endorsed the recommendation of the dealing Assistant to pay the benefit of Assured Career Progression (in short 'ACP') to all the staffs of District Rural Development Authority, Begusarai ('DRDA'). On account of the benefit of 'ACP' a sum of Rs. 8,51,240/- had been withdrawn. When the Deputy Development Commissioner, Begusarai found that the benefit of 'ACP' was not permissible to the employees of the 'DRDA', he issued an order bearing Memo No. 38 (mu) dated 15.6.2015 directing return of 'ACP' amount from the beneficiary employees. For the alleged payment of ACP benefit to the employees a Special Case bearing No. 15/17 and after that Vigilance Case No. 20 of 2017 has been registered on 21.03.2017 under Sections 109, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 13(2) , 13(1) ( C) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against the petitioner and others. In this case the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail.

(3.) Since the petitioner retired from service during the pendency of the aforesaid criminal case, till filing of the writ petition he was not paid anything against gratuity amount. Pension of the petitioner has already been fixed at 90 % keeping in view Rule 43 (ga) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules, 1950')