Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Surya Prakash Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan on 21 July, 2022
Bench: Rekha Borana
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11332/2019
Surya Prakash Sharma S/o Prabhu Lal Sharma, Aged About 71
Years, 1st Gali, Karan Nagar, Sheoganj, District Sirohi,
Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of
Finance, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Jaipur.
3. The Dy. Commissioner (Administration), Commercial
Taxes, Pali.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sushil Solanki
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Dutt
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Order
21/07/2022
The present writ petition has been filed with the following
reliefs:
"(i) By an appropriate order or directions, the
respondents be directed to grant increment to
the petitioner during the period of suspension i.e.
from 21.06.2003 (Annex.1) to 29.07.2007
(Annex.3) with all consequential benefits.
(ii) By an appropriate writ, order or directions, the
respondents be directed to grant all retiral dues
to the petitioner including the gratuity,
commutation, regular pension, etc to the
petitioner."
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that prayer
No.(i) as prayed for in the writ petition has already been taken
(2 of 4) [CW-11332/2019]
care of as vide order dated 02.11.2007, the suspension period of
the petitioner had been directed to be included in his service
period and the increments in pursuance to the same had also been
directed to be granted to the petitioner.
Therefore, the only issue which now remains in the present
writ petition is regarding prayer No.(ii), that is, the retiral benefits
including gratuity, commutation and regular pension. As submitted
by the counsel, the same have wrongly been denied to the
petitioner on the ground of a criminal appeal (S.B. Criminal Appeal
No.756/2007) being pending against him before this Court.
In support of his submissions, counsel for the petitioner
relied upon the judgment passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.13716/2018; Chandra Shekhar Sharma Vs. The State of
Rajasthan and Ors. decided on 29.03.2022. In Chandra Shekhar
Sharma's case, this Court while relying upon the earlier judgments
of this Court passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2153/2012;
Tarachand Agarwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors., decided
on 12.03.2014 and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4542/2009;
Ganpat Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on
13.02.2015 concluded as under:
"In view of the submissions made, it is clear
on record that the petitioner has been acquitted
and after the said order of acquittal by a
competent Court having become final, the release
of the retirement benefits is a necessary
corollary."
This Court further held as under:
"A perusal of the record shows that no
specific order of withholding any benefits,
whether retiral or other benefits has been passed
by the Department at any point of time. It has
also been admitted on record that no
(3 of 4) [CW-11332/2019]
departmental inquiry is pending against the
petitioner as of date. It is clear on record that
the order of suspension was passed only on the
basis of a criminal proceedings being registered
against him and he being arrested qua the same.
As the petitioner has now been acquitted, no
ground whatsoever survives with the respondent
Department to withhold the retiral dues of the
petitioner."
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
was acquitted of the charges levelled under Sections 7, 13(1)(d)
and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 vide
judgment dated 24.03.2007. After the said acquittal, his
suspension was also revoked vide order dated 29.07.2007 and he
superannuated on 30.09.2007. Therefore, there was no occasion
for denying the benefits to him after his retirement as on the date
of his retirement, no criminal proceeding was pending against him.
I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel
appearing for the parties.
This Court is of the clear opinion that once the petitioner
stood acquitted on 24.03.2007 and the Department itself
regularized his period of suspension in the month of November
2007 (although subject to the decision of the appeal), there was
no occasion for the Department to deny the retiral benefits to the
petitioner after the year 2007. However, no grievance regarding
the same was raised till the year 2010. It was only for the first
time in the year 2010 that a representation was submitted by the
petitioner to the Department regarding his retiral benefits.
In view of the ratio as laid down in the case of Chandra
Shekhar Sharma Vs. The State of Rajasthan and Ors. and in
view of the observations as made above, the present writ petition
is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant all the retiral
(4 of 4) [CW-11332/2019]
benefits to the petitioner with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from 06.04.2010 till the date of payment.
All pending applications also stand disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J
Ashutosh-100(S)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
