RAMAN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court for issuing a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay his retiral benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he retired from the post of Section Officer, Home (Special) Department, Government of Bihar on 31.8.1995 but has not been paid his entire retiral benefits. The case of the respondents is that the retiral benefits of the petitioner have been withheld for his committing embezzlement during the period 1984 -91. Their further case is that a FIR in this regard has also been lodged against the petitioner on 30.4.1998 and, therefore he is not entitled for any relief.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has not yet been found guilty of any misconduct either in the disciplinary proceedings or in the criminal proceedings and, therefore, the respondents are not legally justified in withholding his retiral benefits. According to him, while no departmental proceedings was ever initiated against the petitioner, the criminal proceeding is in a very initial stage. He further submitted that mere pendency of the criminal proceeding does not entitle the respondents to withhold his retiral benefits.