VYAS, J. - (1.) THE present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer that the impugned order dtd. 23. 8. 2005 may be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to pay all retiral benefits to the petitioner.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that while the petitioner was posted on the post of Dist. Education Officer, Barmer, a criminal case under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was registered against him. After trial, the petitioner was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur vide order dtd. 13. 10. 2004. Against the order dtd. 13. 10. 2004, the petitioner preferred an appeal in which sentence awarded to the petitioner has been suspended vide order dtd. 2. 11. 2004 and the appeal is pending before this Court. It has been averred by the learned counsel for the petitioner that on the basis of Rule 19 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 and on the basis of Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996, 100% pension has been stopped permanently vide order dtd. 23. 8. 2005 (Annex. 3 ). In this writ petition, the main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the appeal against the order passed by the learned trial Court is a continuous proceedings and order passed by the trial Court cannot be separated. It has also been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that before passing the order dtd. 23. 8. 2005, no notice was giving to the petitioner. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and examined and scanned the material available on record.
(3.) ADMITTEDLY, the petitioner has been convicted by the competent Court and the appeal filed by the petitioner against his conviction and sentence is pending. Though the sentence awarded to the petitioner has been suspended, but the conviction of the petitioner still exists as the same has not been suspended and the appeal is still pending. Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1996) clearly provides that the Governor reserves to himself the right of withhold or withdrawing a pension or part thereof, whether permanently or for a specified period, and of ordering recovery from a pension of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to the Government if in any departmental or judicial proceedings, the pensioner is found guilty of grave misconduct or negligence during the period of his service including service rendered upon re-employment after retirement. Admittedly, the petitioner has been convicted for the offences under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act and the appeal is pending before this Court. The conviction of the petitioner is still in force today, as the same has not been suspended, only the sentence awarded to the petitioner has been suspended. In these circumstances, the pensionary benefits have rightly been withheld in conformity with the provisions of Rule 7 of the Rules of 1996. For the reasons mentioned above, the present writ petition has no force and the same is hereby dismissed. ;