BALKESHI DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

(2.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the order dated 211.2004 issued under the signature of the Deputy Secretary, Health, Medical Education and Family Welfare Department, Government of Bihar, by which 50 per cent pension of the husband of the petitioner has been forfeited under the provisions of Bihar Pension Rules with further prayer for payment of gratuity and other post retiral benefits.

(3.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case is that the husband of the petitioner retired from service on 31.07.2000, from the post of Superintendent, Bihar State Health Store, Gulzarbagh, Patna. Husband of the petitioner joined Bihar Health Service in the year 1971 and he was given junior selection grade w.e.f. 1976 and Senior Selection Grade from 25.05.1978. The husband of petitioner was posted as Director, Tuberculosis Demonstration and Training Centre, Agamkuan, Patna, and transferred as Superintendent, Health Store, Gulzarbagh, Patna, from which post he retired on 31.07.2000. Husband of the petitioner received other pensionary benefits except the pension and gratuity. The husband of the petitioner had also moved this Court in C.W.J.C No. 10388 of 2002 praying for grant of pension and gratuity and during the pendency of the said writ petition, departmental proceeding was initiated against the husband of the petitioner vide resolution dated 21.08.2003 and during the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition vide memo no. 15.12.2003, 90 per cent of provisional pension was sanctioned but no gratuity was sanctioned to the husband of the petitioner. The writ petition of husband of the petitioner was disposed of with a direction to the respondent-authority to conclude the departmental proceeding against the husband of the petitioner, within three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order with liberty to the petitioner to raise the issue of bar of limitation imposed under Rule 43(b) (a) (ii) of Bihar Pension Rules. Memo of charge dated 21.08.2003 was served upon the husband of the petitioner which contained three charges. The charge no. 1 pertains to the year 1997-98, charge no. 2 is also for the same period and charge no. 3 also relates to the period in which husband of the petitioner was posted as Director, TBDC, from 16.05.1995 to 11.08.1997. Husband of the petitioner submitted his reply in which he had stated that as far as Charge No. 1 is concerned, same is based upon the report of Accountant General for audit conducted in the year 1997-98 for the period 1991-92, which not relates to the husband of the petitioner. After husband of the petitioner assumed charge, he directed the cashier to maintain the cash register properly. Charge No. 2 related to irregularity of Rs. 16, 92, 000/-, which was also based on the report of Accountant General, for which the husband of the petitioner submitted his reply that as far as irregularity of Rs. 16, 92, 000/- is concerned a criminal case was also instituted and the police found the case not to be true and submitted final form. As far as Rs. 3,19, 843/- is concerned, a machine was purchased and it was made functional.