FAIYAZ AHMAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this writ application is being disposed of at the admission stage itself. In this writ application, prayer of the petitioner is for quashing the order dated 29th December, 1997, passed by respondent, Deputy Secretary, Water Resources Department, Govt, of Bihar, whereby 50% of the pension amount is sought to be forfeited' for a period of one year only. Further prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to pay the pensionary benefits, legally payable to the petitioner, who retired from the services on 28th February, 1997, as Assistant Engineer from the Water Resources Department.

(2.) CASE of the petitioner, in short, is that he was initially appointed as Junior Engineer in the Water Resources Department and thereafter he was posted at different' places. The petitioner was subsequently promoted on 5.2.79 to the post of Assistant Engineer and, was accordingly, posted in Bagmatr Division, Dheghar, Sitamarhi. While he was Working in Bagmati Division as Assistant Engineer a show cause notice was issued to him in the year 1992 for alleged irregularities and, accordingly, departmental proceeding was initiated, wherein the petitioner ''was found guilty of the charges. While the petitioner was posted as Assistant Engineer, North Koyal Division No. 2, Aurangabad, he was served with chargesheet on 11.8.94 relating to the irregularities admitted by him in the year 1992 -93. In the subsequent another chargesheet the allegation made against the petitioner was that he has shown wrong consumption of 1700 sq. ft. bolder and, thereby caused huge monetary loss to the government, copy of the second chargesheet is made Annexure -7 to this writ application. The aforesaid chargesheet was issued on the basis of the report submitted by the Flying Squad. Pursuant to the chargesheet served upon the petitioner he filed his show cause, copy of the show cause is made Annexure -9 to this writ application. Meanwhile, the petitioner retired on 28.2.97, as stated above, and accordingly, a proceeding in terms of Rule 43 (b) Of the Bihar Pension Rules was initiated with respect to the charges of 1991*92. The respondent authority has passed the impugned order in purported exercise of power under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules.

(3.) FULLY established and, as such, the respondent authority has rightly passed the impugned order withholding 50% of the pension amount and, that too, for one year only. I do not find any illegality in the order passed by the respondent authority.