BIRENDRA KUMAR SINHA Vs. HEALTH SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the Accountant General.

(2.) THE petitioner retired from the service of the State Government on 31.1.2000. Prior to his superannuation the petitioner was arrested on 8.12.1999 in connection with Laheriasarai RS. Case No. 427 of 1999 in which he was made accused under sections 498A and 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. During the period of judicial custody, the petitioner has superannuated. The petitioner had made representation before the respondent authorities for fixation and grant of pension and other consequential pensionary benefits which was under consideration. The office of the Accountant General drew the attention of the State Government towards the pendency of the criminal case against the petitioner. Since the petitioner was taken into custody and remained in Judicial custody till the date of his superannuation, the Deputy Secretary, Government of Bihar vide order dated 24.7.2001 kept the petitioner under suspension with effect from 8.12.1999 from the date he was arrested and till the date of his superannuation. Thereafter a departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner for the same charges. The charge was framed against him by the Dy. Secretary to the Government. In the criminal case petitioner was convicted by the trial Court. Against the judgment and order of conviction, he preferred Cr. Appeal No. 196 of 2002, which was allowed and he was acquitted. The prayer of the petitioner is for payment of salary w.e.f. October, 1999 to January, 2000 and difference of salary w.e.f. 1996 to September, 1999 as well as payment of pension, gratuity and leave encashment. It is submitted that 90% pension has been paid but 10% of the pension with arrears has been withheld. It is also submitted that payment of earned leave has not been made though sanctioned by the Accountant General, payment of gratuity has not been made, G.P.F. has been sanctioned, but payment has not been made. Leave encashment was also sanctioned but it was not paid.

(3.) CONSIDERING these developments now there is no reason for withholding the retiral dues and pension of the petitioner, accordingly, petitioner is entitled for the reliefs prayed in the writ application.