JAGATNARAIN TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click here to view full judgement.
Dhirendra Mishra, J. -
(1.)THIS petition is directed against the order of Annexure P-l, dated 22nd May, 2000 whereby Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur, has stopped paying anticipatory pension to the petitioner in exercise of power under Rule 8 (1) (b) of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules, 1976').
(2.)UNDISPUTED facts are that while the petitioner was posted as Assistant Sub Inspector at Belgahana Chowki, P.S. Kota, he was charge-sheeted, convicted and sentenced under Section 161 of the IPC and Section 5 (1) and 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act vide judgment dated 15-2-1994 passed in Special case No. 3/87. His appeal against conviction is pending before the High Court and substantive jail sentence has been suspended vide Annexure P-2. The petitioner retired on 31st December, 1994 during the period of his suspension and the State Government fixed anticipatory pension after his retirement. However, by the impugned order payment of anticipatory pension has been stopped for the present until further orders.
Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the pension of the petitioner could not be withheld under Rule 8 (1) (b) of the Rules, 1976, as the aforesaid provision can be invoked only when the pensionary employee engages himself in any misconduct in the future. In the instant case, anticipatory pension of the petitioner was fixed after his conviction. He was convicted on 15-2-1994 whereas his pension was fixed after he retired from services on 31-12-1994. He has already preferred appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence and his jail sentence has already been suspended by the Appellate Court. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in any case the petitioner was entitled for payment of minimum pension as per Second Proviso to Rule 8 (1) (b) of the Rules, 1976 and the total amount of pension could not be withheld.
(3.)ON the other hand, Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner was being paid only anticipatory pension since the petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Prevention of Corruption Act. The Competent Authority has withheld payment of pension as per the provisions of Rule 8(1)(b) of the Rules, 1976. ON his appeal only execution of substantive jail sentence has been suspended.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.