PHOOLAN RAI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ application is that though he superannuated from the service of the State Government on 30th June, 1994, but he has not been paid his full post retrial dues.

(2.) Learned Additional Advocate General No. III appearing for the State, however, submits that the amount of G.P.F. of the petitioners has been released and paid to him. As regards the pension and gratuity etc., he submits that a vigilance case relating to misappropriation of huge amount of Government money was instituted and in the same charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner also. As such, under the rules of the Government, the petitioner is not entitled for payment of pension and gratuity.

(3.) From the Finance Department's Circular contained in Memo No. P.C. 11-40-28-74/9144-F, dated 22-8-74 which was further clarified vide finance Department's Circular contained in Memo No. P.C. 11-4-98-98-74-11260-F, dated 31-20-74, it appears that on account of pendency of departmental or judicial proceeding, a Government servant cannot be denied of the full pension. Under the said Circulars 75% of the pension has to be paid to the Government servant during the pendency of the departmental or judicial proceedings. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that by the subsequent circular, the quantum of provisional pension has been increased to 90%. However, he has not been able to bring to my notice any such circular. Learned Counsel further submits that the petitioner has not been paid statutory interest over the G.P.F. amount paid to him. Learned Additional Advocate General No. III submits that in case the statutory interest has not been paid, the same shall be paid with utmost expedition.