IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18001 of 2010 Ram Suresh Tiwary, aged about 62 years, Son of Late Muneshwar Tiwary, resident of Civil Lines, Sasaram, Police Station Sasaram, District Rohtas…………………………………………Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Vishwesharaiya Bhawan, District Patna. 2. The Additional Secretary, Road Construction Department, Vishwesharaiya Bhawan, District Patna. 3. The Joint Secretary, Road Construction Department, Vishwesharaiya Bhawan, District Patna. 4. The Accountant General (A & E), Virchand Patel Path, Patna………………………Respondents ----------- For Petitioner: Mr. Rupak Kumar, Advocate For the State: Mr.P.K. Verma, Addl. A.G. No.5 For Accountant General: Mr. R.K. Choubey, Advocate 6 03.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the Accountant General. By notification, as contained in Annexure-1, whole pension of the petitioner has been stopped permanently in the light of his conviction and sentence in a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. In the notification itself it has been noticed that petitioner has filed an appeal against the judgment of his conviction and sentence in this Court which has been admitted for hearing. 2 From the judgment of the trial court, annexed as Annexure-8 to I.A. No.837 of 2011, it appears that petitioner was put on trial on the charge of having disproportionate property in the name of his wife and daughter. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only property which was found to be disproportionate to his known sources of income was 1 katha 5 dhurs of land along with a three storied house on the same. It appears that Trial Court did not find convincing the defence of petitioner in respect of acquisition of land and construction of house from his legitimate means, on account of which he was convicted. It is an admitted fact that his appeal is pending in this Court for final hearing. Mr. P.K. Verma, Additional Advocate General No.5, submits that the order withholding whole pension of the petitioner has been issued in the light of the letter of the Vigilance Department contained in letter No.1046 dated 3 27.03.2009. He submits that, as long as this letter is operative, Department is bound to pass orders of withholding of whole pension of its employees who are found to be convicted under the Prevention of Corruption Act. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, this Court directs the respondents that if the petitioner gives an undertaking in the form, as may be required, that he will not dispose of the property in question, respondents to release the pension of the petitioner, considering hardship to his family which it may face for years to come, till his appeal is finally decided. The pension which shall be released to the petitioner, on giving an undertaking, shall be on provisional basis and shall not be less than 75%. Petitioner will appear before the Secretary of the Department along with a copy of this order and shall give an undertaking to his satisfaction, upon which order for release of pension of the petitioner, along with its arrears, shall be passed positively 4 within two weeks thereafter. This interim arrangement shall operate till the criminal appeal of petitioner is disposed of finally by this Court. The writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. BT (J. N. Singh, J.)