Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) BY way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner assails the legality and validity of the order Annexure -1 dated 14.5.2004 whereby all the retiral benefits including entire pension accruing upon the retirement of late Sh. Radha Krishan the husband of the petitioner Smt. Radha Devi, was withheld.
(2.) THE petitioner Radha Devi's husband late Shri Radha Krishan was working as Patwari in the Revenue Department of Government of Rajasthan. A criminal case for the offences under Sections 161, 467 and 471 I.P.C. read with Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered against the employee wherein he was convicted by the learned Special Judge, A.C.D. Cases, Bikaner by judgment dated 30.8.1988. An appeal was preferred against the said conviction being S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 401/1988 but during the pendency of the appeal, Shri Radha Krishan passed away on which the appeal was dismissed by this Court as having abated on 20.11.2007. It appears that the petitioner Smt. Radha Devi and the family members were not paid the retiral/pensionary benefits pursuant to the death of Shri Radha Krishan on which they filed a Writ Petition No. 5326/2009 in this Court. Along with the reply to the writ petition, an order dated 14.5.2004 was placed on record by the respondents as per which, the District Collector, Ganganagar ordered that as the employee was convicted in a case involving the offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act and as the High Court did not stay the conviction, the employee was not entitled to receive any pension. The Collector further observed that employee as a matter of fact, should have been terminated from service. However, as the employee had crossed the age of superannuation on 31.12.2000, the Collector directed that he was not entitled to receive any pension whatsoever on account of his conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act. On being made aware of the said order dated 14.5.2004, the petitioners have assailed the same by way of the instant writ petition No. 2599/2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as no departmental proceedings were undertaken against the employee pursuant to his conviction under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act till his retirement, further action if any, was only permissible under the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (hereinafter in short referred to as the Rules of 1996). As per Rule 7 of the Rules of 1996, any proposed action to withhold the pensionary benefits is only permissible upon sanction being accorded by the Governor and after holding a regular inquiry in the manner prescribed in the said Rule. Learned counsel submits that as Shri Radha Krishan has already passed away, no such action can now be taken for holding an inquiry to withhold the retiral benefits and thus the writ petition deserves to be accepted while quashing Annexure -1. He further submits that even the other retiral benefits including the gratuity etc. accruing to the employee upon his retirement were withheld without any reason, which the dependents of the employee are entitled to receive. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition deserves to be accepted and the petitioners be granted pensionary and the other retiral benefits accruing upon the death of Shri Radha Krishan, Patwari.
(3.) DR . Dave, learned A.G.C. contends that as the employee was convicted for the offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act, he was liable to be terminated from service. She further contends that the very effect of conviction for the said offences results into automatic termination, and therefore, the Collector rightly withheld the pensionary benefits of the employee who had superannuated in the meantime. She further contends that the impugned order though passed way back in the year 2004 was not challenged by the employee himself and thus, the petitioners are not entitled to assail the validity of the impugned order in the instant writ petition.;