Full Judgment
2. The facts as gathered from the submission and the pleadings are that the petitioner while in service as District Commandant Home Guard was served a charge sheet on 25-07-2006. The legality whereof was challenged in Writ Petition No. 2330/07(s); wherein initially stay was granted; however, subsequently, the petitioner was dismissed on 02-12-2009.
3. That during pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner was retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation with effect from 31-03-2009. After the retirement provisional pension of the petitioner was fixed as per Rule 64 of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1976 by order dated 17-04-2009 because of pendency of the departmental enquiry.
4. By way of present petition the petitioner claims 90% of the gratuity, earned leave encashment and the amount towards GIS (Group Insurance Scheme).
5. Indisputably a departmental enquiry initiated against the petitioner while he was in service could not be completed because of the stay thereof in Writ Petition No. 2330/07(s), and is pending after his retirement. Rule 64 of the Pension Rules, 1976 makes a provision regarding provisional payment of pension during pendency of the departmental enquiry after retirement. It stipulates : "fu;e 64- vUrfje is a ' ku tgka foHkkxh; vFkok U;kf;d dk;Z o kgh yfEcr gS (Provisional pension where department or judicial proceeding may be pending) (1) (d) fu;e 9 ds mifu;e(4) esa fufnZ"V 'kkldh; lsod ds lEcU/k esa dk;kZy; izeq[k mruh vufUre isa'ku izkf/kd`r djsxk tks ,salh vf/kdre is'ku ds cjkcj gksxh tks 'kkldh; lsod dks lsokfuo`fRr dh rkjh[k rd dh ;k ;fn og lsokfuo`fRr dh rkjh[k dks fuyfEcr Fkk rks ml rkjh[k ftl rkjh[k dks mls fuyfEcr fd;k x;k Fkk ds Bhd iwoZ dh rkjh[k rd dh vgZdkjh lsok ds vk/kkj ij vuqKs; gksA ([k) lsokfuo`fRr dh rkjh[k ls izkjEHk gksdj ml rkjh[k rd rFkk ml rkjh[k dks lfEefyr djrs gq;s ftldks fd foHkkxh; ;k U;kf;d dk;Zokfg;kW lekIr gksus ds i'pkr~ l{ke izkf/kdkjh Onkjk vfUre vkns'k ikfjr fd;s tkosa dh dkykof/k ds nkSjku vufUre isa'ku dk;kZy; izeq[k Onkjk Lfkkiuk osru ns;d ij fudkyh tk;sxh vkSj lsokfuo`Rr 'kkldh; lsod dks Hkqxrku dh tkosxhA
(x) fdlh 'kkldh; lsod dks minku dk Hkqxrku rc rd ugha fd;k tk;sxk tc rd fd foHkkxh; ;k U;kf;d dk;Zokfg;kW lekIr u gks tk;sa vkSj ml ij vfUre vkns'k ikfjr ugha dj fn;k tk;A
ijUrq tgka foHkkxh; dk;Zokfg;kW e/; izns'k flfoy lsok (oxhZdj.k] fu;U=.k rFkk vihy) fu;e 1966 ds fu;e 16 ds v/khu mDr fu;eksa ds fu;e 10 ds [k.M (,d)] (nks) rFkk (pkj) esa fofufnZ"V 'kkfLr;ksa esa ls fdlh Hkh 'kkfLr dks vf/kjksi.k djus ds fy;s lafLFkr dh xbZ gS] ogka 'kkldh; lsod dks fu;eksa ds v/khu vuqKs; minku dk 90% rd vufUre minku dk Hkqxrku fd;k tkuk Hkh izkf/kd`r fd;k tk ldrk g SA
(2) dk;kZy; izeq[k Onkjk vufUre minku LFkkiuk osru ns;d ij fudkyk t;ssxk rFkk fu;e 60 ds mifu;e (2) esa of.kZr 'kks?;ksa dks lek;ksftr djus ds i'pkr~ 'kkldh; lsod dks Hkqxrku laijh{kk dk;kZy; dks lwpuk ds v/khu fd;k tk;sxkA mifu;e (1) ds v/khu vufUre isa'ku@minku ds Hkqxrku dk lek;kstu ,salh dk;Zokfg;ksa dh lekfIr ij ml 'kkldh; lsod dks Lohd`r vfUre lsokfuo`fRr YkkHkksa ls fd;k tk;sxk] fdUrq ml fLFkfr esa dksbZ olwyh ugha dh tk;sxh tgka vfUre #i ls Lohd`r isa'ku@minku WP 11848.10(s)
vufUre isa'ku@minku ls de gS ;k tgka isa'ku@minku dks ;k rks LFkk;h #i ls ;k fdlh fofufnZ"V dkykof/k ds fy;s de dj fn;k x;k gks ;k jksd fn;k x;k gksA"
6. The grant of pension and of gratuity is subject to the gravity of charges levelled against the delinquent government servant. In the case at hand as evident from the charge sheet dated 25-07-2006 [Annexure-P/6 with Writ Petition No. 2330/07(s)], the record whereof was called from the record room at the time of hearing the matter,] that the petitioner has been subjected to following charges :- "(1) "tokuksa ls fM;wVh gsrq fj'or ds #i esa /kujkf'k olwyus dh dk;Zokgh dj Hkz"V vkpj.k iznf'kZr djukA" (2) "vius in dk nq#i;ksx dj gksexk MZ tokuksa Onkjk eafnj Q.M rFkk gekjk ?kj - gekjk nQrj Q.M ds vUrxZr tek dh xbZ jkf'k dks gMiukA"
(3) "eafnj Q.M@gekjk ?kj - gekjk nQ~rj Q.M dk lapkyu] vkpj.k fu;eksa ds fo#/n dk d`R; gksukA" (4) "lSfudksa ds lkFk ekj-ihV laca/kh vuSfrd d`R; dj LosPNkpkfjrk iznf'kZr djukA"
(5) "e0 iz0 flfoy lsok vkpj.k fu;e 1665 ds fu;e-3 lkekU;-1 (,d) (nks) ,oa (rhu) dk mYya?ku djus dk dnkpj.k djukA"
7. In view of the charges levelled against the petitioner, the action of respondent for release of 90% pension excluding gratuity and the leave encashment cannot be faulted; because, in case in a departmental enquiry the petitioner is found guilty of defalcation and the recovery of government money is ordered, the same can be recovered from the amount of gratuity and leave encashment. In this context regard can be had to the judgment in State of Orissa and others v. Kalicharan Mohapatra and another : (1995) 6 SCC 105 and Union of India v. G. Ganayutham : AIR 1997 SC 3387.
8. In view of law above and facts of present case no direction can be given to respondents to release 100% pension, or any fraction of gratuity and leave encashment.
9. In respect of GIS the petitioner is at liberty to move the authorities for its release and on such application being filed by petitioner, the authority concerned shall dwell upon it objectively. With the above liberty to the petitioner, the petition stands dismissed. No costs.