- (1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner retired on 30th November, 2007 from services of State of Jharkhand as Executive Engineer, but, he was given the pay scale of Assistant Engineer only and therefore, respondents may be directed to give the pay scale of the post of Executive Engineer likewise respondents have not even finalized the amount of pension as well as the amount of gratuity of the present petitioner and therefore, if a suitable direction is given so that the respondents may decide final pension payable, gratuity and the pay scale of the post of Executive Engineer.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents submitted that the aforesaid decision has not been taken because of the pendency of the case against the present petitioner and the same is pending before the competent court in the State of Bihar since 1989. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, who has submitted that in view of the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Dr. Dudh Nath Pandey Vs. State of Jharkhand & others as reported in 2007(4) JCR 1(Full Bench), the respondents cannot retain retirement benefits because of criminal case is pending and nothing has been completed against the present petitioner, even petitioner was not named in the FIR, but, latter on upon statement of co -accused, petitioner joined as an accused and the highest claim of the prosecution in the said criminal case is about asking of the bill worth Rs. 2,547/ - for not verifying before signing, but, the case is pending and as on today, nothing has been concluded against the present petitioner and no civil enquiry is pending against the present petitioner. It is also submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that for the very same alleged misconduct, departmental enquiry was conducted in the year 1989 and he was censored by way of punishment. The said order is at Annexure -2 to the memo of the writ petition and therefore, petitioner can not be punished twice for the very same misconduct.
(3.) IN view of these submissions and looking the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that as on today, no criminal proceeding has been completed against the present petitioner. Petitioner already retired on Executive Engineer on 30th of November, 2007, but, the respondent -State has not given the pay scale of Executive Engineer likewise, pension and gratuity have also not been finalized by the respondents. Looking to the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Dr. Dudh Nath Pandey Vs. State of Jharkhand & others as reported in 2007(4) JCR 1, respondents cannot withhold the amount of pension and gratuity merely because of a criminal case is pending. It also appears from the facts of the case that for no fault of the petitioner, criminal case is pending before the competent trial court in the State of Bihar from 1989.;