SHIV CHAND RAVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed commanding upon the respondents to release the pensionary benefits i.e. gratuity, leave encashment, increment and family pension along with arrears of salary for the period from 13.11.2003 to 21.12.2006, during which the petitioner was put under suspension.

(2.) In compliance of order dated 07.10.2014 passed in W.P. (S) No. 4929 of 2013, by which, the counsel for the State was directed to seek instruction on the plea of petitioner that respondents cannot withhold the amount of pension, gratuity and leave encashment simply on account of pendency of criminal case, in view of Full Bench Judgment of this Court, in the case of <B>Dr. Dudh Nath Pandey Vs. State of Jharkhand, as reported in 2007 (4) JCR 1(Jhr.) (FB)</B>, the respondents have filed supplementary counter affidavit dated 01.12.2014, wherein, it has been inter alia, submitted that petitioner has not filed any application for payment of pension, leave encashment or any dues before the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Godda. However, it is averred that if the petitioner applies for the same in proper format, it could be paid as per rule and regulation. It has further been contended in the supplementary counter affidavit that so far as arrears of pay during the suspension period is concerned, the same is subject to payment after disposal of Complaint case being C.P. Case No. 55 of 2003, which is pending against the petitioner. So far as gratuity is concerned, it is stated that the same is not payable unless and until final order is passed in C.P. Case No. 55 of 2003 in view of Finance Department Memo dated 22.08.1974.

(3.) The main thrust of the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondents cannot withhold the amount of pension, gratuity and leave encashment simply on account of pendency of criminal case, in view of Full Bench Judgment of this Court, in the case of Dr. Dudh Nath Pandey (Supra), and affirmed by the Honourable Apex Court in the case of <B>State of Jharkhand Vs. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava, reported in 2013(3) JLJR (SC)537.</B>