VENKATESHWAR NATH PANDEY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing the Notification as contained in Memo No. 1169, dtd. 25/8/2015, whereby his pension and gratuity has been permanently withheld under the provisions of Rule 43(a) of Jharkhand Pension Rule. Petitioner has further prayed for a direction upon the respondents to release entire retiral benefits including pension, gratuity, provident fund etc. along with statutory interest and other consequential benefit. Petitioner has also prayed for grant of subsistence allowance from 1/9/2009 till the date of his retirement in terms of Rule 97 of the Jharkhand Service Code at the rate of 75% and 90% of the last pay drawn for the period under which he was put under suspension.

(3.) According to petitioner, he was appointed as Touring Veterinary Officer, Madhubani, Block - West Champaran and joined the post on 14/5/1979. He was thereafter transferred to Mandar as Block Animal Husbandry Officer on 8/5/1990 and he continued as such till the date of his retirement i.e. 30/6/2013. It is alleged that an FIR dtd. 4/2/1996 was instituted by the Department against several persons for the offence under Ss. 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 472, 474, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Ss. 5(c), (d) and (e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, being RC No. 53(A)/Pat for alleged embezzlement and misappropriation of Government funds from the Department. Chargesheet against the petitioner was submitted on 11/5/2000 and thereafter he was put under suspension vide order dtd. 6/7/2000. Petitioner was taken into custody on 8/6/2000 and was later on released on bail on 30/1/2001. However, petitioner was convicted vide Judgment dtd. 1/7/2009, passed in RC No. 53(A)/Pat and was awarded punishment of imprisonment of 5 years with a fine of Rs.11,00,000.00, failing which he had to undergo an additional punishment of custody of 21 months. Against the said Judgment of conviction and order of sentence, petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 708 of 2009, which is pending before this Court. However, petitioner has already been granted bail vide order dtd. 15/9/2009.