- (1.) HEARD Sri Sri Jagdish Singh Bisht holding brief of Sri Sharad Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Subhash Upadhyay, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttaranchal and Mrs. Beena Pandey, learned Stand ing Counsel for the State of U. P.
(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following re liefs :-a- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 27- 01 -1998 passed by the District Magistrate, Haridwar as contained in (Annexure 8) to this writ petition. b- Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus com manding the District Magistrate, Haridwar to release the gratuity and pension which is remained un-paid on account of this order 25% gratuity has been ordered to be deducted, c- Issue any other writ, order or di rection, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case d- Award the cost. Vide order dated 2/- 01-1998 passed by the District Magistrate, Haridwar 25% gratuity and pension of the petitioner was recommended to be deducted. The facts, in brief as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Naib Nazir in district Saharanpur on 07- 07- 1958. On 28-12-1988 a new district Haridwar was constituted after carving out the bounda ries of district Muzaffarnagar and Saharanpur and the same was notified in the Gazette on 01-02-1989. Options were invited from the employees of dis trict Saharanpur and the petitioner opted for district Haridwar. The peti tioner, after completing the successful tenure was going to be retired on 31-07- 1996, however before his retirement, the respondents served charge sheet dated 12-07- 1996 and 18-07- 1996 levelling certain charges against the petitioner. Three charges were levelled against the petitioner and the first of them relates to the incident dated 30-04-1996 by which the petitioner was charged that he has not handed over the files of public auction of the movable and immovable properties of the village Sabbirpur Tehsil Deoband, district Saharanpur. The sec ond charge was in respect of the illegal recommendation for purchase of Almirahs amounting to Rs. 75,000/-whereas; the amount which was sanc tioned for purchase of Almirahs had al ready been spent by the Nazarat Depart ment by purchasing Almirahs and the third charge was for violating the offi cial secrecy by publishing a news/press note in daily news paper 'badri Vishal' and 'amar Ujala' dated 13-06-1996 & 14-06-1996 about the irregularities and corruption in the Collection Department of Collectorate, Haridwar.
(3.) A departmental inquiry was or dered to be initiated and accordingly the Inquiry Officer after conducting inquiry submitted a report to the District Mag istrate on 17th January 1997 holding pe titioner guilty of all the three charges lev elled against him. Since, no final order was passed by the District Magistrate, the petitioner preferred writ petition no. 25967 of 1997 before the Allahabad High Court and the Allahabad High Court disposed of the writ petition di recting the authorities concerned to con sider the question of payment of gratu ity of the petitioner in accordance with law without being influenced by any ob servations made in the order, after hav ing passed appropriate order in the dis ciplinary proceedings, if it is not com pleted and to complete and pass order, if not already passed. The Allahabad High Court further observed that the question of payment of gratuity shall be subject to the result of the order that might be passed in the disciplinary pro ceedings. It would be open to the re spondents to take into account the let ter dated 31-01-1997 and 10-04-1997 issued by the District Magistrate to the Board of Revenue and the letter of Board of Revenue respectively. Vide letter dated 31st January 1997, the District Magistrate, Haridwar forwarded the pension papers alongwith all relevant documents regarding the pe titioner to the Board of Revenue, Pen sion Cell. The letter dated 10-04-1997 is the letter by which the pension was sanctioned to the petitioner. Thereafter, the District Magistrate on 27th January 1998 passed final order on the discipli nary proceedings initiated against the petitioner withholding 25% amount of gratuity and pension of the petitioner for the Misconduct of the petitioner. The District Magistrate also sought approval of Board of Revenue and ultimately, the Govt. of U. P. vide order dated 30th January 1999 permitted the respondents to deduct 25% amount of the pension. The petitioner has challenged this order by way of amendment application and the amendment application was allowed by the order dated 23-04-1999 passed by the Allahabad High Court, and the same was incorporated vide order dated 04-12-2006 passed by this Court.;