Raj Kumar Bhadoriya vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 6199 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 37
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 18562 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Raj Kumar Bhadoriya
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ajay Sengar
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kushmondeya Shahi
 

 
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for respondents 1 and 3. Mr. Tanuj Shahi Advocate holding brief for Mr. K. Shahi learned cousnel for respondent no.2. In view of order being passed notices to opposite party No.4 stands dispensed with.

Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to allow post retirement benefits to petitioner and to consider and decide his claim. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Bundelkhand Inter College, Madhograh, District Jalaun which is duly recognized institution under grant in aid. It is submitted that during course of his services, first information report was lodged and trial commenced in Sessions Trial No. 160 of 2013 under Section 377/511, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 in Police Station Madhavgarh, District Jalaun. It is submitted that in the aforesaid criminal case, the petitioner had filed application No. 16800 of 2017 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in which the parties compromised and therefore vide order dated 17th May, 2022, the aforesaid application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was allowed and in pursuance thereof, the sessions court vide order dated 9th June, 2022 has put a quietus to the criminal proceedings.

It is further submitted that in the meantime the committee of management vide its proposal dated 28th July, 2013 suspended services of petitioner but subsequently the said proposal was withdrawn vide resolution dated 8th April, 2017 due to which vide order dated 15th April, 2017 suspension order was recalled. It is submitted that subsequently petitioner superannuated on 31st March, 2021 and submitted his application for grant of post retirement benefits which however has not yet been paid. It is submitted that subsequently vide letter dated 24th July, 2021,the petitioner has been informed that since the issue pertaining to termination of service of petitioner is still pending consideration, the post retirement benefits can not be paid.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the since petitioner has already superannuated from service on 31st March, 2021, there is no occasion for the respondents to withhold the post retirement benefits particularly in view of the fact criminal proceedings against petitioner already stands quashed and no final decision was taken by the respondents pertaining to its disciplinary proceedings against petitioner. It is submitted that even otherwise the petitioner's services would be governed by the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 which does not have any provision for continuance of disciplinary proceedings after superannuation. Learned counsel has placed reliance on judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Committee of Management Jai Jawan Jai Kisan Inter College versus State of U.P. and others, Writ A No. 9644 of 2019.

Learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents on the basis of counter affidavit submits that petitioner's services was suspended during course of his inquiry and proceedings pertaining to termination of his services were already recommended while the petitioner was already in service. It is submitted that the proposal for payment of post retirement benefits to petitioner were forwarded to the Deputy Director of Education, Jhansi Region, Jhansi consequently vide order dated 3rd July 2021 sanctioning provisional pension to petitioner while requiring the District Inspector of Schools to make communication in respect of payment of post retirement benefits to petitioner. In pursuance thereof, the District Inspector of Schools vide letter dated 24th July, 2021 and 11th January, 2022 has requested the Secretary,U.P. Secondary Education, Services Selection Board for expeditious disposal of termination matter of the petitioner. It is thus submitted that since the Board has not yet taken final decision in the matter, the petitioner is not entitled to payment of any pensionary benefits.

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, it is evident that criminal case lodged against petitioner in case crime No. 535 of 2019 has already come to an end with the quashing of sessions trial No. 160 of 2013 vide order of this Court dated 17th May, 2022 as indicated herein above. It is also apparent from the contents of counter affidavit that till date no final decision has been taken by the respondents pertaining to termination of services of petitioner even though the petitioner has already superannuated on 31st March, 2021.

The aspect of dispute as to whether the disciplinary proceedings can be continued against a Lecturer in terms of Intermediate Education Act, 1921 even after superannuation has already been considered by this Court in the case of Committee of Management Jai Jawan Jai Kishan Intermediate College (supra) in which this Court while relying upon another coordinate Bench decision in the case of Iliyas versus state of U.P. and others reported in 2012 SCC Online Allahabad 1011 has concluded that there is no provision in the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 which provides that disciplinary proceedings can be continued even after the delinquent has superannuated. It has been further held that resolution of termination by the management sent even before the date of superannuation is of no consequence since the grant of approval on the issue of removal of delinquent under Section 21 of the Act of 1982 has not been taken prior to superannuation. Relevant portion of the judgment is as follows:-

"20. In this regard, Para 17, 18, 19 and 20 of judgment passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Iliyas vs. State of U.P. and others reported at 2012 SCC Online All 1011, is referred and mentioned hereinafter :-

"17. Needless to mention that there is no provision under in the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 or the Regulation framed thereunder which deals with issue that if the person is placed under suspension and during the period of suspension retired from service then a disciplinary proceeding can either be instituted or conducted after retirement.

18. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Bhagirath Jena Vs. Board of Directors, O.S.F.S. And others (1999) 3 SCC 666 in para Nos. 6 and 7 held as under:-

"Para No. 6. It will be noticed from the abovesaid regulations that no specific provision was made for deducting any amount from the provident fund consequent to any misconduct determined in the departmental enquiry nor was any provision made for continuance of departmental enquiry after superannuation.

Para No. 7. In view of the absence of such provision in the abovesaid regulations, it must be held that the Corporation had no legal authority to make any reduction in the retiral benefits of the appellant. There is also no provision for conducting a disciplinary enquiry after retirement of the appellant and nor any provision stating that in case misconduct is established, a deduction could be made from retiral benefits. Once the appellant had retired from service on 30.6.95, there was no authority vested in the Corporation or continuing the departmental enquiry even for the purpose of imposing any reduction in the retiral benefits payable to the appellant. In the absence of such authority, it must be held that the enquiry had lapsed and the appellant was entitled to full retiral benefits on retirement."

19. The abovesaid view was further reiterated by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of India and others Vs. J.J. Paul, (1999) 4 SCC 759.

20. Accordingly, in absence any provision in the Act, 1921 Rule or Regulation framed there in which governs the field for initiating or conducting the disciplinary proceedings after retirement of Teacher/Principal of the Intermediate Institution the competent/concerned authority after the retirement of a Teacher/principal cannot proceed to initiate or conduct the disciplinary proceedings after his retirement and the entire disciplinary proceedings if initiated would laps with the retirement.

21. For the foregoing reasons, once there is no specific provisions in the in the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 or Regulation framed thereunder for initiation of a disciplinary proceeding or continuing the disciplinary proceeding against petitioner who placed under suspension after his retirement then the action on the part of official respondents to withhold his post retiral dues is an action which is arbitrary in nature, thus, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as well as principles of natural justice (See. Rajesh Kumar Saxena Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. and others, 2007 112 FLR 784 (Alld)."

(emphasis supplied)"

Upon applicability of the aforesaid judgments in the present facts and circumstances of the case, it is admitted case of parties that the petitioner has superannuated from service on 31st March, 2021 but till date no final decision with regard to termination of his services have been taken by the respondents. No provision under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 could be adverted to by the respondents to indicate that disciplinary proceedings can be continued against a delinquent Lecturer even after his superannuation. In such circumstances, the aforesaid judgments are fully applicable in the present case due to which the petitioner is definitely entitled for payment of retirement benefits.

Considering the aforesaid, a writ in the nature of Mandamus is issued commanding the respondent No.3 i.e. Manager, Committee of Management, Bundelkhand Inter College, Madhograh, District Jalaun to ensure payment of post retirement benefits to petitioner within a period of four months from the date a copy of this order is produced before him.

Consequently the writ petition stands allowed. No order as to costs.

Order Date :- 7.7.2022

Prabhat