IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINTIAL Civil Writ Petition No. 269 of 2002 (S/B) Shri Bharphoor Singh ………..Petitioner. Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal through Home Secretary, Uttaranchal 2. Director General of Police, Uttaranchal 3. Director General of Police,U.P. 4. Police Mahanirdeshak, Merrut Zone 5. Police Upmahanirdeshak Garhwal Range 6. S.S.P.Dehradun. ………..Respondents Sri Ashok Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Paresh Tripathi, learned standing counsel for the respondents Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. By way of this writ petition, the petition has sought a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2 and 3 for making the payment of his post retirement benefits including the pension. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner was Head Constable in police and retired form services on 31.10.1997. At the time of this retirement, he was posted at Dehradun. The petitioner was initially appointed as Constable on 30.10.1956 in the U.P. Police and subsequently, he was promoted on the post of Head Constable on 27.10.1978. The petition further reveals that the petitioner was posted at P.S. Mawana District Meerut in the year 1983 and there, a case was registered under Section 409 I.P.C. against him. The order of suspension passed against the petitioner was revoked on 12.11.1987. It further reveals from the petition that after revocation of the suspension order, the petitioner completed his services upto the year 1997 and during this period there was no stigma against him. It has been averred in the writ petition that after the retirement of the petitioner the respondents are deliberately and intentionally avoiding to pay the post retirement benefits like pension and gratuity, however they are paying provisional pension which is also not as per the pay scale of the petitioner. It has also been averred that the petitioner has made several representations to the respondents but no action has been done so far, hence this writ petition. The counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents pleading therein that the criminal case No. 286 of 1983 under Section 409 I.P.C. is still pending against the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is being paid the provisional pension in view of the Uttar Pradesh Civil Service (Tenth Amendment) Regulations, 1983. The petitioner has filed the rejoinder affidavit stating therein that there is another Government Order of the year 1989, which envisages that the pension of the Government servant cannot be retained during the pendency of any criminal proceeding. Heard leaned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Sub Rule- 2 of Uttar Pradesh Civil Service (Tenth Amendment) Regulations, 1983 regards as follows:- “The provisional pension shall be authorized for the period commencing form the date of retirement up to and including the date of which after the conclusion of departmental or judicial proceedings or the enquiry by the Administrative Tribunal, as the case may be final orders are passed by the competent authority.” Again Sub-Rule 3 of the above said Rule reads as follows: “No date-cum-retirement gratuity shall be paid to the Government servant until the conclusion of the departmental or judicial proceedings or the enquiry by the Administrative Tribunal, and issue of orders thereon.” Further the Government Order dated 28.07.1989 issued by U.P. Government reveals that the relevant abstract pertaining to the procedure in order to make other payment except the Government accommodation reads as follows:- “¼[k½ ljdkjh Hkou ds vfrfjDr vU; ns;ksa ds lEcU/k esa dk;Zokgh% ¼1½ flfoy lfoZl jsxqys’kUl ds vuqNsan 470 ch esa ;g izkfo/kku gS fd fdlh ljdkjh lsod dks isa’ku Lor% ns; ugha gksrs tc rd fd mldh lsok iw.kZr% larks’ktud u ik;h x;h gksA ‘’kklukns’k fnukad 13@12@1977 esa ;g fu.kZ; fy;k x;k Fkk fd bl izfo/kku dk lgkjk dsoy viokn :i:I ekeyksa esa gh fy;k tk;sxk vkSj ;g vko’;d ugh gksxk fd isa’ku lEcU/kh leLr ekeyksa dks foHkkxk/;{k vFkok fu;qfDr izf/kdkjh ds ikl Hkstk tk;A mDr 'kklukns’k esa ;g izkfo/kku dj fn;k x;k Fkk fd lsokfuo`fRr dh rkfj[k esa vkB eghus igys isa’ku izi= vizlkj.k djus okys vf/kdkjh }kjk fu;qfDr izkf/kdkjh ls bl rF; dh iwNrkN dh tk;sxh fd D;k iw.kZ isa’ku izi= vxzlkj.k djus okys vf/kdkjh }kjk fu;qfDr izkf/kdkjh ls ,slh iwNrkN dh tk;sxh fd D;k iw.kZ isa’ku eatwj djus ds ctk; de isa’ku nsus dk fopkj gS vFkok dksbZ dk;Zokgh izkjEHk djus dk fopkj gSA mDr 'kklukns’k esa ;g Hkh fu.kZ; fy;k x;k Fkk fd ;fn fu;qfDr izf/kdkjh ls ,slh iwNrkN dk mRrj izkIr u gks ;k eku fy;k tk;sxk fd iwjh isa’ku ls de /kujkf’k Lohd`r djus dh dksbZ ea’kk ugha gS vkSj isa’ku izi=ksa dks Lohd`r vf/kdkjh dks Hkst fn;k tk;sxkA mijksDr izfo/kku ds ifjizs{; esa vc fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gs fd dk;kZy;k/;{k }kjk ;g dk;Zokgh lsokfuo`fr ds vkB ekg igys dh tk;sxh vkSj fu;qfDr vkf/kdkjh dk ;g nkf;Ro gksxk fd os okafNr lwpuk ,d ekg ds Hkhrj miyC/k djk nsaA ;fn fu;qfDr izkf/kdkjh ls ,d ekg ds Hkhrj ,slh lwpuk izkIr ugha gksrh gS rks vkSj vkxs izrh{kk fd, fcuk dk;kZy;k/;{k dk ;g nkf;Ro gksxk fd os isa’ku izi= isa’ku Lohd`r djus gqrq vxzlkfjr dj nsaA ¼2½ flfoy lfoZl jsxqys’kUl ds vuqPNsn 351&, esa ;g izkfo/kku gS fd ;fn ljdkjh lsod fdlh foHkkxh; dk;Zokgh ds QyLo:i tkus vutkus jkT; ljdkj dks foRrh; gkfu igWqpkus dk vFkok fdlh vU; xaHkhj nqjkpj.k dk nks"kh ik;k x;k gks vFkok fdlh U;kf;d dk;Zokgh ds ifj.kkeLo:Ik nafMr fd;k x;k gks rks jkT;iky dks vf/kdkj gS fd og mldh iwjh vFkok vkaf’kd isa’ku jksd ldrs gSaA ,slh foHkkxh; vFkok U;kf;d dk;Zokgh rc rd izkjEHk gqbZ ugha ekuh tkrh gS tc rd ljdkjh lsod dks vkjksi i= u ns fn;k x;k gks A vr% ;fn mijksDrkuqlkj dksbZ dk;Zokgh lEiUu ugha dh x;h gS rks bl fu;e ds vUrxZr fdlh Hkh ljdkjh lsod dh isa’ku u rks jksdh tk ldrh gS vkSj u gh de dh tk ldrh gSaA ,slh n’kk esa ;g Li"V fd;k tkrk gS fd ;fn fdlh ljdkjh lsod ds fo:) ,slh dk;Zokgh izkjEHk ugh dh x;h gS vFkok iw.kZ ugh dh x;h gS rks mldh isa’ku jksdus dk dksbZ vkSfpR; ugha gS vkSj mlds isa’ku izi= LohdrkZ vf/kdkjh dks Hkstdj mls iw.kZ isa’ku Lohd`r djok nh tk;sxhA dsoy lsokfuo`fRr xzsP;qVh ls ,sls ns;ksa dh olwyh dh tk;sxh ftudh fLFkfr lsokfuo`fRRk ds fnukad rd Li"V gks pqdh gksaA ¼3½ ,sls ljdkjh lsodksa dks] ftuds fo:) lsokfuo`fRRk ds fnukad dks] foHkkxh;@U;kf;d vFkok iz’kklukf/kdj.k dh tkWp py jgh gks vFkok iz’kklukf/kdj.k tkWp fd;k tkuk visf{kr gks 'kklukns’k la[;k lk 3&1679@nl&80&909&79]fnukad 28 &10&1980 ds vuqlkj vafre isa’ku dk Hkqxrku dj ns;k tk;sxk fdUrq xzP;qVh dh iw.kZ /kujkf’k rc rd jksdh tkdsxh tc rd ,slh tkWp dk ifj.kke izkIr u gks tk;A xzsP;qVh dh /kujkf’k ls og dVkSfr;kW dh tk;saxh ftudk mYys[k foHkkxh;@ iz’kklfud dk;Zokgh ds QyLo:i ikfjr vkns’k esa fd;k x;k gksA bl izkfo/kku ds vUrxZr Lohd`r vafre isa’ku dsk vafrae :Ik ls Lohd`r gksus okyh isa’ku ls lek;ksftr dj fy;k tk;sxk fdUrq ;fn vafre :Ik ls Lohd`r gksus okyh isa’ku dh jkf’k vafre isa’ku ls de gks vFkok isa’ku LFkk;h :Ik ls fdlh fuf’pr vof/k ds fy, de dj nh tk; ;k vLFfxr dh tk; rks ljdkjh lsod ls dksbZ olwyh ugha dh tk;sxh A;g izfo/kku vU; lekU; ekeyksa esa tgkW vafre isa’u dh /kujkf’k ls vkx.ku dh =qfV vFkok vU;Fkk fdlh vU; dkj.k ls vf/kd ikbZ tk;s] ykxw ugha gksxk bl izdkj ds ekeyka esa vf/kd Hkqxrku dh x;h /kujkf’k vafre isa’ku dh /kujkf’k ls lek;ksftr dj yh tk;sxhA bl gsrq ;fn isa’kuj viuh isa’ku ls ,d eq’r vFkok ekfld dVkSrh djokus ij vkifRr djs rks okafNr fjdojh jkgr dh /kujkf’k ls dkbZ fof/kd vM+pu ugha gSA** After having careful reading of aforesaid two Government Orders, it is quite clear that the criminal case pending against the petitioner has not been finalized as yet, therefore, it cannot be presumed at this stage whether the petitioner would be convicted in that case. The provisions of the regulations provided in the Government Orders itself take sufficient care to protect the interest of the Government and can certainly act in accordance with the said rule provided the employee is found guilty. However, it does not mean that the respondents have the right to withhold the entire amount of pension. Mere pendency of the criminal case against the petitioner is not sufficient to withhold the pension as well as post retrial benefits of the petitioner. It quite clear that the petitioner was placed under suspension but his suspension was ultimately revoked in the year 1987 and after his suspension was revoked, he worked for another 10 years in the Department. In view of the aforesaid observation, I am of the view that the respondents should pay the full amount of the pension to the petitioner as well as other post retirement benefits payable to the petitioner. However, the respondents may retain the gratuity to be paid to the petitioner till the final adjudication of the criminal case. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of finally. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 16.06.2005 ASWAL