UDAI NARAIN THAKUR, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, SON OF LATE CHHOTAK, THAKUR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE Vs. THE UNION OF INDIA THOUGH DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O.A. No. 844 of 2011 was filed by the petitioner before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna for a direction upon the respondent-State of Bihar to release the entire gratuity amount, sanction 100% pension and also allow commutation of pension. The O.A. application was heard and dismissed vide order dated 16th of Dec., 2015, therefore, the writ application.

(2.) Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that a reading of Rule 6(1) of All India Service (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958 would show that the allegation, if any, against a Government servant must relate to the period of service, for his conduct 'in service' under the respondents. According to him, the service herein would mean service as an IAS Officer and not the previous service of a Bihar Administrative Service (BAS). If Rule 6(1) is applied, Rule 6(2) has no role to play.

(3.) It is also urged that an FIR was lodged way back in the year 2000. There was a departmental enquiry also into the so called charges and allegations. The Divisional Commissioner exonerated the petitioner, therefore, the pendency of the criminal case is only a formality and for all practical purposes the petitioner should be treated as having come clean on the issue.