The Patna High Court, while disposing of a petition filed against the non-payment of full gratuity, earned leave, and 10% of the pension to the petitioner, held that the respondent state has the authority to withhold or withdraw a pension or any part of it if the pensioner is convicted of serious crime. The Court said that future good conduct is an implied condition of every grant of pension.
Brief Facts:
While the petitioner was working as a Peon in the Government, he was put under suspension due to his incarceration in a case registered for offenses under Sections 304B/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code. On being released from judicial custody, the petitioner was allowed to join, and subsequently, the suspension of the petitioner was revoked by the Department in the year 2017. The petitioner superannuated on 28.02.2019 from the post. On being aggrieved by non-payment of full gratuity, earned leave, and 10% of pension, he has filed the present writ petition invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the petitioner came to be superannuated and he was paid a provisional pension to the tune of 90% along with GPF and insurance amount. However, the petitioner was not paid the full gratuity amount, leave encashment as well as 10% of the pension.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that since the petitioner has been facing a criminal case pending before the learned Sessions Judge, the petitioner has been allowed 90% of the provisional pension, whereas the entire gratuity as well as leave encashment have been withheld.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that the State authorities are empowered to withhold payment of the entire gratuity if the employee is facing departmental or judicial proceedings on the date of his superannuation.
The Court observed that no error in the order withholding gratuity. The petitioner is facing a criminal case for the offenses under Section 304B and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code and as such, there is no charge in relation to defalcation or misappropriation of government/public money giving rise to any chance of recovery. However, the respondent state has the authority to withhold or withdraw a pension or any part of it, if the pensioner is convicted of a serious crime. The Court said that future good conduct is an implied condition of every grant of pension.
The decision of the Court:
The Patna High Court, disposing of the petition, held that the petitioner is to file a proper representation before respondent no. 2 for payment of admissible due leave encashment.
Case Title: Yogendra Sah v The State of Bihar & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Harish Kumar
Case no.: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2952 of 2022
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Randhir Kumar
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. Raj Kishore Roy
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
