1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.1452/2005. : : Padam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : : Date of Order 24.9.2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr.Dharmendra Agarwal for the petitioner. Ms.Sudesh Kasana, Deputy Govt.Counsel for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition has been filed by a retired Government servant with the prayer that the respondents be directed to finalise his pension case and pay him all his retiral dues including the amount of GPF, S.I. and leave encashment with interest. The petitioner was serving with the respondents as Mining Guard in the Office of Mining Engineer, Alwar. He was transferred to Mining Engineer, Karauli on deputation. A First Information Report was lodged against the petitioner for offence under Section 409 IPC for alleged embezzlement of Rs.480/-. The petitioner in connection therewith was placed under suspension vide order dated 20.6.2000. In the 2 meantime a challan was filed against him in the Court, but the petitioner then retired from service on 27.2.2002. The trial Court acquitted the petitioner of the aforesaid charge vide judgment dated 18.10.2002. The petitioner then made number of representations and finally served a notice for demand of justice on 31.3.2003. Still two years thereafter when he was not paid the pension and retiral dues, he had to file the present writ petition. The respondents have contested the case of the petitioner by stating that in so far the judgment of the trial Court is concerned, they have filed an appeal against the same. Additionally, it was stated that proceedings for sanctioning provisional pension to the petitioner have been initiated and that the respondents are also going to hold against the petitioner regular enquiry under 16 of the CCA Rules and till finalization of such proceedings, the retiral dues and final pension cannot be paid to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has rejoined and submitted that till date neither the petitioner has been served with charge-sheet nor has he received any notice of any appeal against the judgment of the trial Court. Upon consideration of the aforesaid arguments and perusal of the records, it appears that the respondents in 3 their reply, which was filed on 12.4.2006, stated that they were going to file appeal against the order passed by the trial Court acquitting the petitioner. The judgment of the trial Court is on record, which is dated 18.10.2002 and obviously it shows that for a period of 4 years no appeal was filed. There is no reason to disbelieve the version of the petitioner when he states that so far he has not received any notice of appeal. Moreover no particulars of charge-sheet under Rule 16 of CCA Rules have been given in the reply to the writ petition, nor any charge-sheet has been received by the petitioner so far. The petitioner, who retired on 27.2.2002 cannot be made to suffer for an indefinite period to get pension and other retiral dues. In the result, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to finalise the pension case of the petitioner and pay to him pension, and all his retiral dues including arrears of salary, amount of GPF, S.I. and salary in lieu of PF with interest @ 12% per annum as per Rule 89 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 for the period of delay that actually occurred in making payment of the retiral dues to the petitioner excluding the period of 60 days from the date of his retirement i.e. 27.2.2002. 4 Compliance of the judgment be made within three months from the date copy of the judgment is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.41.