Bhikhubhai Vasrambhai Parmar vs Industrial Commissioner
2022 Latest Caselaw 7163 Guj

     C/SCA/15175/2019                              JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2022




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15175 of 2019


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

==========================================================

1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
      to see the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
      of the judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial question
      of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
      of India or any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
                        BHIKHUBHAI VASRAMBHAI PARMAR
                                    Versus
                           INDUSTRIAL COMMISSIONER
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR JIGER K MEHTA(7548) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR UTKARSH SHARMA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,4,5
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

                               Date : 17/08/2022

                               ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, learned

Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of

C/SCA/15175/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2022

Rule for the respondents.

2. Called out twice, however, Mr. Mehta learned counsel for

the petitioner is absent.

3. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following

reliefs:

"(a) Be pleased to admit and allow this writ petition.

(b) Be pleased to issue writ of mandamus, certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction to the respondent to release pension, gratuity and other available retirement benefits to the petitioner as holding said benefits being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law."

4. The facts in brief would indicate that the petitioner joined

services of the respondent No.1 on 2.6.1977 as a Peon. By

an order dated 21.4.2012, an order of punishment of

compulsory retirement has been imposed on the petitioner.

It is his case that though he has approached the authorities,

C/SCA/15175/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2022

no response has been made or he has been granted any

pensionary benefits.

5. Learned AGP Mr. Sharma for the respondents would

submit that looking to the prayers made in the petition, it

is apparent that the order of penalty is not under challenge.

When a penalty of compulsory retirement has been

imposed, an employee would not be entitled to any

pension except compassionate pension.

6. Having heard Mr. Sharma, learned AGP for the State and

having considered the prayer made in the petition, perusal

of the order imposing a penalty of compulsory retirement

indicates that pursuant to charges levelled against the

petitioner for misappropriation of Rs.1,04,000/-, a penalty

of compulsory retirement was imposed.

7. Rule 77 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules,

C/SCA/15175/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2022

2002 reads as under:

"77. Grant of Compassionate Pension:

(1) A Government employee who is removed or required to retire from Government service for misconduct or insolvency shall be granted no pension other than a compassionate pension.

(2) A Government employee who is removed or required to retire from Government service on the ground of inefficiency, shall, if he be eligible for a superannuation, or retiring pension, be granted such pension. If he is not eligible for a Retiring or Superannuation pension, he shall be granted no pension other than a Compassionate Pension."

8. Reading the rule indicates that a government employee

who was required to retire from government service for

misconduct, as is the case on hand, the case for

compassionate pension can be considered. Rule 78 also

indicates that the case of such an employee for

compassionate pension can be considered if deserving.

9. Accordingly, if an application is made by the petitioner

C/SCA/15175/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/08/2022

under Rule 77 of the Rules, the same shall be considered

in accordance with law and a decision be taken

accordingly.

10. The petition stands disposed of in above terms. Rule is

made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is

permitted. No costs.

(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) VATSAL S. KOTECHA