Allowed

Mukhraj Meena S/O Shri Champaram Meena v. District Collector Dausa

Rajasthan HC11 May 2023CW/4727/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan directed respondents to release all accumulated retiral benefits and pension to a retired government servant with 9% interest per annum, as no criminal charges or departmental enquiries were pending against him. The court held that withholding benefits after acquittal and acceptance of final reports was unauthorized.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to release all retiral benefits with 9% per annum interest within two months.

Mukhraj Meena S/O Shri Champaram Meena Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/010435]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4727/2019

¶4

Mukhraj Meena S/o Shri Champaram Meena, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Bamnwas District Sawaimadhopur

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

District Collector Dausa, District Dausa.

¶8

Assistant Collector Cum Metropolitan Magistrate, Lalsot HQ Ramgarh Pachwara District Dausa.

¶9

Director, Pension Department Rajasthan Jaipur.

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shashi Bhushan Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandra Vikram Singh

¶12

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶13

Order

¶14

11/05/2023

¶15

Matter comes up on an application (I.A. No. 1/2023) filed by the petitioner-applicant for early listing of the matter.

¶16

Application stands allowed for the reasons stated therein.

¶17

With the consent of the parties, arguments have been heard at this stage.

¶18

Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-

¶19

“It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that Your Lordships’ may graciously be pleased to admit and allow this writ petition; call for and examine entire record of the case and

¶20

a) By an appropriate writ, order and direction in the nature thereof the action of the respondents of withholding service and post retirement benefits of the petitioner for no reason my kindly be

[2023/RJJP/010435]

[CW-4727/2019]

(2 of 4)

deprecated. Further the respondents may kindly be directed to make fixation in seventh pay Commission and thereafter determine all due service and post retirement benefits including pension and pay arrears thereof together with 18 % interest per annum from due date to the date of actual payment thereof.

¶25

b. Any other relief as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper be also passed in favour of the petitioner.”

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner stood retired from the post of Clerk Grade-II on 30.06.2016 on attaining the age of superannuation. Counsel submits that at the time of his retirement, no departmental enquiry was pending against him under Rules 16 and 19 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1958 (for short, ‘the Rules of 1958’). Counsel submits that District Collector, Dausa issued an order dated 24.08.2016 certifying the above facts, but it was observed by the Collector that petitioner is facing trial in criminal case pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Lalsoat, Dausa and FIR No. 558/2015 was registered against the petitioner at Police Station Kotwali (Dausa). Counsel submits that on the basis of the aforesaid order dated 24.08.2016, pension and all other retiral dues of the petitioner was withheld by the respondents. Counsel submits that subsequently the petitioner was acquitted in criminal case No. 67/2012 by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1- Lalsot, Dausa vide judgment dated 02.06.2018. Counsel submits that in FIR No. 558/2015 registered at Police Station Kotwali (Dausa), Final Negative Report was submitted and the same was

[2023/RJJP/010435]

[CW-4727/2019]

(3 of 4)

accepted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Dausa. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, no criminal case is pending against the petitioner, so the respondents be directed to release all the retiral benefits along with interest forthwith.

¶31

Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that at the time of retirement of the petitioner, two criminal cases were pending against him i.e. why retiral dues were not released to the petitioner as per Rule 90 of the Rajstahn Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1996 (for short, ‘the Rules of 1996’). Counsel submits that provisional pension was paid to the petitioner, hence the respondents have not committed any error in withholding the retiral benefits of the petitioner.

¶32

Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 8. This fact is not in dispute that petitioner stood retired from the post of Cleark Grade-II on 30.06.2016 on attaining the age of superannuation. This fact is also not in dispute that at the time of his retirement, two criminal cases were pending against him and in one criminal case he was facing trial before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Lalsot, Dausa for the offence under Section 409 IPC and one FIR No. 558/2015 was also pending against the petitioner with police Station Kotwali Dausa. 9. Perusal of the record indicates that in criminal case No. 67/2012, the petitioner has already been acquitted from the charge for offence under Section 409 IPC by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lalsot, Dausa vide judgment dated 02.06.2018 and in FIR No. 558/2015 registered at Police

[2023/RJJP/010435]

[CW-4727/2019]

(4 of 4)

Station Kotwali Dausa, Final Negative Report (FAR) has been submitted by the Investigating Agency and the same has been accepted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2-Dausa vide order dated 12.03.2022.

¶37

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, neither any criminal case is pending against the petitioner nor any departmental enquiry is pending against the petitioner under Rules 16 and 19 of the Rules of 1958, so under these circumstances, the respondents have no authority to withhold the retiral dues and they are duty bound to release all the retiral benefits to the petitioner forthwith without any delay.

¶38

In view of the discussions made hereinabove, this civil writ petition is disposed of with directions to the respondents to release all the retiral dues of the petitioner with interest @ 9 % per annum in terms of Rule 89 of the Rules of 1996 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶39

Before parting with this order, liberty is granted to the respondents to file an application for revival of this petition, in case the above facts with regard to acquittal of the petitioner and acceptance of Final Report are found to be in-correct. 13. Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶40

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶41

Ashu/119

Mukhraj Meena S/O Shri Champaram Meena v. District Collector Dausa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukhraj Meena S/O Shri Champaram Meena v. District Collector Dausa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.S.E.B. Vs Rashtriya Vidyut Karmachari Sangh

Udai Chand Vs State and Ors.

Rseb Ajmer Vs Bhanwar Lal Sharma

Rsrtc Jaipur Vs Digamber Singh

State of Raj Vs R C S a T and Ors.

Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Shri Nagendra Nath Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan