ii^N's^^..,^. £s£^^.;?ii';; r'0 ...>•• ,\0.^^---:... ..^?%:^--"""" ^:fs^^ \u . -•.a-* IN THE HON'BLE HIGH"COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) WRIT PETITION (S) N0. \^SS. / 2010 IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ; AND IN THE MATTER OF CHHATTISGARH CIVIL SERVICES (PENSION) RULES, 1976; PETITIONER AND BETWEEN : Ram Kumar Verma, son of Late Shri Anuj Ram Verma, aged about 60 years, resident of Virdhi Colony, Kota, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^' 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary Department of Higher Educatipn, Mantralaya D.K.S Bhawan, Raipur Chhattisgarh ^ 2. Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ^,- 3. Director, Directorate of Treasury, Account and Pension, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4. Principal, Government Nagarjuna Post Graduate Science College, Raipur 5. Accountant General, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT IN THE NATURE OF IVIANDAMUS AND FOR ISSUANCE QF QFHER SUITABLE WRITS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTJONS, ORDER OR ORDERS Arun MIQN (XlURTQt? CyHATTBOARH AT BILASPUR VWtlt PETmON (Sli N0.1482 of0)W PeBUoner Resoondent Vereus Ram Kumar Verma Stae of Chhattisgarh & othera WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon'ble Mr. SaUsh K. Agnihdri, J.) Present:- Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate tor the petitioner. i Shri N.N. Roy, Pane! Lawysr for the Stat&'respORderft No. 1 to 4. Shri R. Pradhan, Advocate for the responderrt Na 5. ORDER(ORAU (Passed on 6*' of ^irii, 2010) 1. Learned counsel appearing for Uie peUttoner submits th^ the petifioner was working as Assistant Grad&'ll (Cashier) at the time of attainmg the age of superannuation on 30.04.2009. On the date of reUremen^ the petitioner was served with a cha-ge she^ dated 28.05.2009 (Annexure P/4) for having caused loss to the State exichequer to ttie extent of Rs. 6,04,428. The enquiry is pending cohsideration. On ac(a>unt of pendency of the enquiry, provisional pension has baen released. However, the petitioner claims gratuity and other benefits during the pendency of the departmentalenquiry. = 2. Rule 84 ofthe Chhatfegsi-h CwB Services (Pension) Riries, 1876 provides for withhdding of gratuity. The head of the depatment has been authorized under the provisionsof Rule 64(4) to consider the gravity of charges and pass appropriate orders. The head of the ofBce is empowered to exereise his jurisdtetion for payment of provisional penston and 50 percent of gratuity taking into consideration tiie grawty of the charges ievetled against the emptoyee. In ttwcsse «ihand, ttiera is an allegation that the petitioner has caused a loss crf 6,04,428/- to tke publte exchequer, thus "rt was decided not to grant the gratu'rty and pay anticipatory pension to the tune of 90 pereent of Sie totet pansiona^ amount 3. I do not find any irr^ularity or itl^ality in the pnter dated 20.06.2009 passed by the Principal, i.e. the respondent N0. 4. Since theeltegation is serious in nature, no directlon can be issued to release tto grateity amount Ull the compleUon of the enquiry. 4. However, it is expected that the pending enquiiy which was initiatal in May, 2009, having regard to th&tacte situation of ease fcatthe petitioner has afready retired from service, the enquiry may be conetuded es eariy as possible, preferably within a period of fourmonths. 5. WHh the aforesaid observations, the writ petition ss djsposed of. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihom 1 Judge