Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ramsewak Narwaria vs Forest Department on 11 January, 2022
Author: Pranay Verma
1
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP No. 6698 of 2020
(RAMSEWAK NARWARIA Vs FOREST DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS)
Indore, Dated : 11-01-2022
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Neeraj Bharti, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Sanjay Karanjewala, learned counsel for the respondent/State.
Heard.
By this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioner has prayed for grant of pension and gratuity to him and to direct
the respondents to continue to do the same.
02. As per the petitioner, he was appointed in Forest Department,
Dewas on the post of Forest Ranger on 07.02.1978. He was charged and was
convicted under Section 13(1) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act
by the Special Judge, District Indore vide judgment dated 29.05.2009. Against
the said judgment, petitioner has preferred Criminal Appeal No..627/2009
before this Court which is still pending adjudication. At the time of the
incident, petitioner was posted at Gandhi Nagar, Mandsaur and was
suspended by order dated 25.02.2005 passed by the Chief Conservator of
Forest, Khandwa/respondent No.3 on the basis of registration of criminal
case against him and was eventually dismissed from service on 16.09.2009.
03. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that gratuity
and pension are not being paid to the petitioner though they are his right and
are in the nature of his property. The same cannot be taken away from him
pending departmental or criminal proceedings. The action of respondents in
withholding payment of pension and gratuity to the petitioner and in not
paying the same to him are in violation of provisions of Article 31(1) and
Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. It is further submitted that by a
notice dated 22.04.2019 to all respondents the petitioner prayed for release of
pension and gratuity to him but no reply to the same has been given till now.
Signature Not Verified
SAN
0 4 . Reply has been filed by the respondents in which they have
Digitally signed by JYOTI
CHOURASIA
Date: 2022.01.14 10:59:00 IST
submitted that proceedings under the Prevention of Corruption Act were
initiated against the petitioner pursuant to which he was firstly suspended and
thereafter by order dated 16.09.2009, was dismissed from service. In criminal
case, petitioner has been convicted and his appeal against the same is pending
before this Court. It is submitted that as the petitioner has been dismissed
from service, which order has not been challenged by him, he is not entitled
for release of pension and gratuity in his favour.
05. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the
record. It is seen that upon registration of criminal case against the petitioner
he was firstly suspended by order dated 25.02.2005 and was eventually
dismissed from service by order dated 16.09.2009 passed by respondent
No.2. The petitioner has been convicted for offences punishable under
Section 13(1) and 13 (2) of the Prevention and Corruption Act. 1988 by the
Special Judge in Special Case No.03/2005. Though the petitioner has
preferred Criminal Appeal No.627/2009 before this Court against the said
conviction, but therein only the sentence awarded to the petitioner has been
stayed and conviction has not been stayed. Nothing has been brought on
record by the petitioner to suggest that he has challenged his dismissal order
dated 16.09.2009 in any manner.
06. Thus in view of conviction of the petitioner in the criminal case
instituted against him and his dismissal from service on account of such
conviction which dismissal has not been challenged by him, it cannot be held
that the respondents have committed any illegality in withholding the pension
and gratuity of the petitioner. Thus no case is made out from grant of any
relief to the petitioner in this petition , which is accordingly dismissed.
(PRANAY VERMA)
JUDGE
jyoti
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by JYOTI
CHOURASIA
Date: 2022.01.14 10:59:00 IST
