IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8951 of 2011. Narayan Murti aged abut 63 years son of Late Keshav Murti resident of Mohalla Khajpura P.S.Shastri Nagar District Patna ..Petitioner. Versus 1.The Union Of India through the Under Secretary, Govt. of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pension(Department of Personnel and Training), New Delhi. 2.The Accountant General (A & E), Bihar, Patna. 3.The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna. 4.The Treasury Officer, New Secretariat, Vikas Bhawan, Patna. ..Respondents. ----------- 2 08.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the order of the learned Tribunal whereby O.A.No. 333 of 2010 preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed on 31stMarch 2011. Rule 6(2) of the All India Services (Death cum- Retirement Benefits)Rules,1958) was placed before us to submit that because after cognizance, the Hon’ble Apex Court has stayed further proceeding in a criminal case instituted against the petitioner, the respondent-authorities could not have withheld any part of his gratuity or pension. Rule 6(2) of the Rules vests the concerned Government with the required power to withhold gratuity or pension, in whole or in past, on account of institution of any departmental or judicial proceeding against a pensioner. 2 There can be no dispute that the Vigilance Department submitted charge-sheet leading to institution of judicial proceeding in which cognizance has been taken by the learned court concerned. The institution of case is not affected by stay of further proceeding. The Tribunal has rightly relied upon judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Orissa and others vs. Kalicharan Mohapatra and another, AIR 1996 SC 684, in which similar action under Rule 6(2) of the aforesaid Rules was upheld by the Supreme Court. We find no merit in the writ petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Jay/ (Shiva Kirti Singh,J) (Shivaji Pandey, J)