KEDAR RAM MODI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Chatra dated 25th March 1996 (Annexure-7) whereby while revoking the suspension of the petitioner from date of his retirement i.e. 31st March 1993, he has held that the petitioner will not be entitled to the rest of the salary apart from subsistence allowance from the said period. The petitioner's appeal was also dismissed by the Commissioner, North Chhotanagpur Division, Hazaribagh by order dated 29th April 1999 vide Service Appeal No. 80 of 1997 (Annexure-9) whereby the order of the Deputy Commissioner has been upheld by the appellate authority on the ground that the petitioner was not fully exonerated from the charges in the criminal trial conducted against him for certain allegations of financial irregularities under sections 409, 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Tandwa (Chatra) P.S. Case No. 41 of 1988. The appellate authority also upheld that original order of the Deputy Commissioner by observing that the petitioner has not been exonerated from the charges of non-production of document on demand before the competent authority in respect of the claim of payment of prescribed wages and wheat to muster roll labourers and for mis utilization of Government money.

(3.) RESPONDENTS have appeared and filed their counter affidavit. In their statements made therein, respondents have given the details of the post retirement dues paid to the petitioner at paragraph-8 while justifying issuance of the impugned orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority as well as the Appellate Authority. According to the respondents, petitioner retired from service during the period of his suspension without having worked for the period under suspension on account of criminal charges and trial initiated against him along with the Mukhia concerned for allegations of financial irregularities in respect of payment of wages and wheat to the muster roll labourers. It is the case of the respondents that the acquittal was not clean acquittal and the petitioner was not fully exonerated of the charges. He has been paid group insurance amount amounting to Rs. 4575.00, provisional gratuity amounting to Rs. 32,000.00, earned leave encashment of 240 days amounting to Rs. 30,720.00, GPF amount of Rs. 75,633.00. The A.G., Bihar has fixed his pension through his letter no. 732 dated 23rd September 2000. The petitioner has been paid second time bound promotion benefits and final pension has been fixed thereafter which the petitioner is drawing from Treasury. So far as the claim of subsistence allowance for the period from 3rd November 1988 to 31st May 1989 and from 4th August 1989 to 6th December 1989 is concerned, it has been stated that the petitioner had remained absent during the said period and there are no evidence to show that he attended the office during the said period of his suspension, although during his suspension, he was to mark the attendance in the office where he was attached to. However, the petitioner has been paid subsistence allowance for the period from 1st June 1990 to 30th June 1990.