Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kamata Prasad Soni vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 5 January, 2023
Author: Chief Justice
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH,
CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRA
ON THE 5 th OF JANUARY, 2023
WRIT APPEAL No. 911 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
KAMATA PRASAD SONI, S/O SHRI MAHAVEER PRASAD
SONI, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED
FROM GOVERNMENT SERVANT AND AT PRESENT
PRACTICING AS AN ADVOCATE, R/O KARAUNDIYA
SOUTH, GOPALDAS ROAD, SIDHI DISTRICT (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY MS. ANCHAN PANDEY - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, THROUGH
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE
DEPARTMENT, VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. UNDER SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF M.P.
3. ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY AND
C O N V E N E R , PERMANENT COMMITTEE OF
COUNCIL OF MINISTERS M.P.
4. THE COLLECTOR DISTRICT SIDHI (MADHYA
PRADESH)
5. DISTRICT PENSION OFFICER, DISTRICT SIDHI
Signature Not Verified
SAN (MADHYA PRADESH)
Digitally signed by PREM SHANKAR
MISHRA
Date: 2023.01.06 19:02:58 IST
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI S.S. CHAUHAN - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE)
2
This appeal coming on for admission this day, Hon'ble Shri Justice
Ravi Malimath, Chief Justice passed the following:
ORDER
Aggrieved by the order dated 05.05.2022 passed by the learned Single
Judge in dismissing the Writ Petition No.10141 of 2022, the petitioner is in
appeal.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he was convicted for the offence
punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the
Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with a
fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default S.I. for 3 months and R.I. for 3 years with a fine
of Rs.10,000/-, in default S.I. for 3 months, respectively. Aggrieved by the
same, he filed Criminal Appeal No.3782 of 2017 which is pending
consideration. By the order dated 04.10.2017, the sentence was suspended. In
the interregnum, the respondents passed an order complying the provisions of
Rule 9 of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 for withdrawing his
pension in view of the fact that the criminal proceedings were pending against
him. Questioning the same, the instant petition was filed.
3. The learned Single Judge while relying on the judgment of the Larger
Bench of this Court in the case of Lal Sahab Bairagi vs. State of M.P. and
others, reported in 2020(2) M.P.L.J. 551 dismissed the petition. Hence, this
appeal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that the order passed by
the learned Single Judge is erroneous and liable to be set aside. The findings
recorded by the learned Single Judge that the matter is covered by the judgment
Signature Not Verified
SAN
of Division Bench is not correct. Various other judgments are sought to be
Digitally signed by PREM SHANKAR
MISHRA
relied upon.
Date: 2023.01.06 19:02:58 IST
5. Having considered the contentions, we do not find any merit in this
appeal. The questions that were referred for consideration to the Larger Bench
included the question as follows:
"3. Whether the authority is required to issue a show cause
notice prior to passing of an order in terms of Rules 8 and 9 of
the Pension Rules of 1976, in cases of withdrawal of pension or
part thereof on account of conviction in a criminal case?"
The Larger Bench answered the said question as follows:-
"(iii) It held that the authority is not required to issue notice
or afford prior opportunity of representation before passing the
order under Rule 8(2) of the Pension Rules of 1976, in respect of
a pensioner who has been convicted in the criminal cases.
However, the power of the authority to take action under the
Rules would be subject to the guidelines as stated by the
Supreme Court in the case of Tulsiram Patel (supra) and
reiterated by this Bench in the preceding paragraphs of this
judgment."
6. Therefore, the contention being advanced to the effect that prior hearing
has to be afforded is no more res integra. It is covered by the judgment of a
Larger Bench of this Court as referred to herein-above. The learned Single
Judge has rightly applied the judgment. We do not find any error in the order
passed by the learned Single Judge.
7. The writ appeal is accordingly dismissed.
(RAVI MALIMATH) (VISHAL MISHRA)
CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
psm
Signature Not Verified
SAN
Digitally signed by PREM SHANKAR
MISHRA
Date: 2023.01.06 19:02:58 IST
