Jharkhand High Court
Sohan Mahto vs State Of Bihar And Ors. on 3 October, 2002
Equivalent citations: 2002(50)BLJR2392
Author: S.J. Mukhopadhaya
Bench: S.J. Mukhopadhaya
ORDER S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.
1. The petitioner was in the services of the State, retired on 31st January, 1998 from the post of Panchayat Sevak. He having not received the retiral benefits has preferred this writ petition.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that no proceeding under Rule 43 (b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 was initiated against the petitioner, nor any notice under Rule 139 (b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 was given to him. The respondent-Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad has no jurisdiction to initiate any departmental proceeding after the retirement of petitioner either for the purpose of punishment or for the purpose of withheldment of retiral benefits as has been made vide Memo No. 146 dated 8th March. 2002.
3. It is also submitted that the respondents after the retirement of petitioner cannot raise any dispute relating to legality and propriety of matriculation certificate which was not produced by the petitioner.
4. It appears that the petitioner was suspended vide Memo 301, dated 19th December, 1990 (Annexure-3) on the allegation that he secured job on the basis of a forged certificate. Thereafter, though order of suspension was revoked but the proceeding did not reach finality till the petitioner superannuated from service as a criminal case was also lodged against the petitioner for similar charges.
5. Under Rule 43 (b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 the State Government reserves right to themselves of withholding or withdrawing a pension or any part of it, permanently or for a specified period. As per Clause (a) to the Explanation below Rule 43 (b) a departmental proceeding for this purpose shall be deemed to have been instituted if the Government Servant has been placed under suspension from an earlier date.
6. For the allegation the petitioner having suspended in the year 1990 though the departmental proceeding stands reached finality for the purpose of punishment, the said departmental enquiry shall be deemed to be continuing under Rule 43 (b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 from the date the petitioner was placed under suspension.
7. In the aforesaid background, if the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad fide Memo No. 146, dated 8th March, 2002 appointed an Enquiry Officer to hold enquiry in respect to charge of submission of forged Matriculation Certificate, I am not inclined to interfere with such proceeding.
8. If the petitioner is in the custody, he may request the Inquiry Officer to defer the date of hearing till he is enlarged on bail. In such case the Enquiry Officer will defer the date of enquiry till the petitioner comes out of custody. The petitioner may renew the prayer for payment of retiral benefits after the completion of the departmental proceeding.
9. So far as provident fund amount is concerned, the respondents will pay it back to petitioner within two months, if not yet paid.
10. The writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observation.