- (1.) With the consent of the Learned Counsel for the parties, present petition is finally disposed of at this stage without calling for the counter affidavit in view of the fact that only question of law is involved in the present case. Petitioner, who was working as Deputy Superintendent of Police, stood retired with effect from 01.12.2009, on attaining the age of superannuation. Vide impugned order dated 31.12.2010, 50% pension of the petitioner was directed to be withheld by invoking Rule 43(b) of the Jharkhand Pension Rules.
(2.) Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has knocked the door of this Court by invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(3.) Mr. Ashok Kumar Yadav, Learned Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that Rule 43(b) of the Jharkhand Pension Rules can be invoked for withholding the full or partial pension only when disciplinary authority finds that due to misconduct, action omission or negligence on the part of the Government employee, Government has suffered any pecuniary loss. He further contends that after calculating such pecuniary loss, same can be directed to be recovered from the pension of such Government employee. Mr. Yadav further argues that if no pecuniary loss has been suffered by the Government for the alleged misconduct or negligence on the part of the Government servant, Rule 43(b) cannot be pressed in service, withholding the pension either in full or in part.;