Central Administrative Tribunal - Jammu
Tarsaim Paul Sharma vs University Of Jammu on 13 February, 2026
:: 1 :: TA 25/2025
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAMMU BENCH, JAMMU (RESERVED)
Hearing through video conferencing
Transfer Application No. 25/2025
Reserved on: - 20.11.2025
Pronounced on: - 13.02.2026
HON'BLE MR. RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, MEMBER (J)
Tarsaim Paul Sharma Age 63 years S/o Sh. Raghunath Dass Sharma
R/o Ward No. 5, Samba.
...Applicant
(Advocate: - Mr. Rakesh Sharma)
Versus
1.University of Jammu Through its Registrar Baba Saheb Ambedkar
Road, Jammu.
2.Vice Chancellor University of Jammu Baba Saheb Ambedkar Road,
Jammu.
3.Assistant Registrar Establishment, University of Jammu Baba Saheb
Ambedkar Road, Jammu.
4.CAO Pension Cell, University of Jammu Baba Saheb Ambedkar
Road, Jammu.
...Respondents
(Advocate:- Mr. Anil Sethi)
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV
:: 2 :: TA 25/2025
ORDER
Per: - Rajinder Singh Dogra, Judicial Member
1. The WP ( C ) No. 900/2024 was transferred from the Hon'ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir at Jammu and was registered as T.A No.25/2025 by the Registry of this Tribunal.
2. The present matter was filed before the Hon'ble High Court seeking following relief: -
a) " An appropriate writ order or direction in the nature of writ of Certiorari for quashing order of respondent no. 3 bearing No. Estab./21/18145 dated 23.02.2021 being patently illegal, arbitrary and against law of service jurisprudence particularly relevant provisions of Civil Service Regulations ably and elaborately been dealt with by this Hon'ble Court.
b) An appropriate writ order or direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus whereby directing the respondents:-
a) To release the withheld increments for the year 2009 and 2010,
b) To release and grant the withheld benefit of carrier Advancement Scheme due to the petitioner w.e.f. March 2012,
c) To completely settle the pension case of petitioner by adding the benefits of released increments as well as benefit of Carrier Advancement Scheme and thereafter determine, release and pay arrears by adjusting the amount of provisional pension,
d) To release and pay 20% withheld amount of leave encashment, and also
e) To release and pay withheld full amount of Gratuity, HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 3 :: TA 25/2025 And all the aforesaid due, pre and post retiral benefits directed to be released alongwith penal rate of interest as the same have illegally been withheld by the respondent University even after taking legal opinion of Senior University standing Counsel as well as by deliberately ignoring the relevant provisions of Civil Service Regulations which do not authorize the respondent University to withhold all or any of the aforesaid service benefits in the given facts and circumstances of the case. C) Any other writ, order or direction befitting the occasion may please also be allowed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
3. The facts of the case as pleaded by the petitioners in their pleadings are as follows: -
a) The present Transfer Application arises out of WP(C) No. 900/2024, which stood transferred from the Hon'ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and registered before this Tribunal as T.A. No. 25/2025. The applicant, a retired employee of the University of Jammu, has approached this Tribunal assailing the continued withholding of his service and retiral benefits despite the absence of any concluded departmental or criminal proceedings establishing his guilt
b) The applicant joined the services of the University of Jammu as a Junior Assistant on 08.03.1985. Over the years, he earned HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 4 :: TA 25/2025 promotions on the basis of satisfactory service record and rose to the post of Senior Assistant on 27.05.2002 and thereafter to the post of Head Assistant on 07.04.2008. While functioning as Head Assistant in the Evaluation (Professional) Section, with additional charge relating to B.Ed. Evaluation for the year 2008, the applicant, on the request of the Coding Officer and the designated Coding Assistant, assisted in completing residual coding work owing to personal exigencies of the latter. The applicant asserts that such assistance was rendered bonafide, without any consideration, and strictly under the supervision of the appointed Coding Officer, after which the answer scripts were duly deposited in the custody of the Store Keeper, leaving no scope for tampering or extension of undue benefit to any candidate.
c) Subsequently, on 09.06.2009, the applicant was called by the University authorities and was informed that his presence was required by the police. Thereafter, he was taken into custody in connection with FIR No. 174/09 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 RPC, along with several other employees.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 5 :: TA 25/2025 The applicant maintains that neither the specific allegations nor his individual role were disclosed to him at the time. He was granted interim bail on 12.06.2009, which was made absolute on 22.06.2009. Consequent upon his detention, the applicant was placed under suspension with effect from 09.06.2009 vide order dated 17.06.2009.
d) During the period of suspension, the applicant was served with a memorandum of charges dated 04.02.2010, to which he submitted a detailed reply on 04.03.2010, denying the allegations and requesting revocation of suspension. After affording him a personal hearing on 20.04.2010, the Registrar recommended reinstatement pending outcome of the criminal proceedings. Accepting the said recommendation, the Vice- Chancellor ordered reinstatement of the applicant vide order dated 02.06.2010, while directing that the treatment of the suspension period be placed before the Establishment Committee.
e) Despite meetings of the Establishment Committee and availability of a legal opinion clarifying the position, the HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 6 :: TA 25/2025 applicant's case regarding settlement of the suspension period, release of increments, fixation under revised pay scales, and grant of benefits under the Three Tier Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) remained undecided for years. This resulted in continued financial loss to the applicant, including non-release of increments, stagnation of pay, and denial of arrears under the 6th Pay Commission. Eventually, vide order dated 13.02.2014, full pay and allowances were released from the date of reinstatement, but two annual increments due in July 2009 and July 2010 were withheld till the final outcome of the criminal case.
f) The applicant was later promoted to the post of Section Officer on 01.02.2016, though he claims entitlement to such promotion w.e.f. March 2012 under the Three Tier CAS. On attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.2020, the applicant retired from service. However, vide order dated 23.02.2021, the respondent- University sanctioned only provisional pension at 50% of basic pay, withheld full gratuity, retained 20% of leave encashment, HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 7 :: TA 25/2025 and denied final pensionary benefits on the ground of pendency of the criminal case.
g) The applicant contends that no departmental inquiry was ever concluded against him, nor has any court of law convicted him till date. He asserts that the allegations in the criminal case do not relate to any proven financial loss caused to the University and that the criminal proceedings have remained pending for more than a decade without framing of charges. According to the applicant, the continued withholding of increments, CAS benefits, pension, gratuity, and other retiral dues amounts to imposition of punishment without adjudication of guilt, in violation of settled principles of service jurisprudence and constitutional protections.
4. The respondents have filed their reply statement wherein they have averred as follows: -
a) The respondents have filed a detailed reply opposing the Transfer Application and have questioned its maintainability. It is contended that the applicant has approached this Tribunal merely to secure directions for release of benefits despite the HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 8 :: TA 25/2025 pendency of serious criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No. 174/09, which is stated to be pending before the Court of the Learned Electricity Magistrate, Jammu
b) The respondents admit the applicant's service particulars, including his appointment, promotions, suspension, reinstatement, and retirement. It is stated that the applicant was placed under suspension in accordance with Section 31(2) of the Jammu & Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956, following his arrest in connection with the aforesaid FIR. He was duly charge-sheeted vide memorandum dated 04.02.2010 and afforded an opportunity to submit his reply and to be heard in person by the competent authority.
c) The respondents submit that, after due consideration, the Vice-
Chancellor ordered reinstatement of the applicant pending outcome of the criminal case, while leaving the treatment of the suspension period to be decided by the Establishment Committee. It is further stated that legal opinions were obtained from time to time to determine the effect of the pending HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 9 :: TA 25/2025 criminal proceedings on fixation of pay, treatment of suspension period, and release of service benefits. Based on the recommendations of the Establishment Committee, full pay and allowances were released w.e.f. the date of reinstatement, subject to withholding of two annual increments till conclusion of the criminal case.
d) With regard to pensionary benefits, the respondents assert that provisional pension was granted in terms of Article 168-A of the Civil Service Regulations, 1956. It is contended that 80% of leave encashment was released, while 20% was withheld in accordance with Rule 37 of the J&K Civil Service Leave Rules, pending final disposal of the criminal proceedings. The respondents further submit that gratuity and final pension could not be released in view of legal opinions advising that such benefits are to await the outcome of the criminal trial, especially when the suspension period itself remains undecided.
e) The respondents deny any illegality or arbitrariness in their actions and maintain that the continued pendency of the criminal case, in which challan has been filed and proceedings HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 10 :: TA 25/2025 are stated to be ongoing, legally justifies withholding of certain benefits. On these grounds, the respondents pray for dismissal of the Transfer Application with costs.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. The present Transfer Application has been received on transfer from the Hon'ble High Court and has been registered as T.A. No. 25/2025. The applicant essentially seeks release of his withheld service/retiral benefits (including increments, gratuity, and the retained portion of leave encashment) and assails the action of the respondents in sanctioning only provisional pension while withholding other retiral dues on the ground of pendency of a criminal case.
7. The admitted backdrop is that the applicant remained in the employment of the respondent-University for decades, was suspended in the year 2009 upon registration of an FIR alleging offences under Sections 420/467/468/471/34 RPC, was thereafter reinstated pending outcome of the criminal proceedings, and ultimately retired on superannuation on 30.11.2020. The respondents have sanctioned provisional pension and have withheld certain retiral components, HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 11 :: TA 25/2025 including gratuity and a part of leave encashment, citing pendency of the criminal proceedings and legal opinions obtained by the University.
8. The applicant's grievance is that he has not been convicted; no departmental inquiry culminating in a finding of guilt is shown to have been concluded; the criminal trial has remained pending for years; and the withholding of increments/retiral dues amounts, in effect, to imposing civil consequences without final adjudication.
9. The respondents' consistent stand is that since a criminal case is pending trial (challan stated to be filed and matter pending before the competent criminal court), the University has acted as per applicable service/pension framework by granting provisional pension and withholding other retiral benefits till finalization of criminal proceedings; and that the suspension period also cannot be finally settled till the verdict.
10. There is no dispute that a criminal case has been registered against the applicant relating to the alleged offences under Sections 420/467/468/471/34 RPC, and the matter is stated to be pending before the court of competent jurisdiction. It is equally not disputed HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 12 :: TA 25/2025 that the applicant has retired and, therefore, is entitled to pensionary benefits in accordance with law; however, the mode and extent of such release, where criminal proceedings are pending, is governed by the pension/service regime applicable to the employee. In service jurisprudence, pension is not a bounty. At the same time, the law also recognizes that where a judicial/departmental proceeding is pending, the employer is not rendered remediless and may regulate the disbursement of retiral benefits, particularly those components which are, by their nature, liable to be impacted by the final outcome of the proceedings. This is the rationale behind provisions enabling provisional pension pending conclusion of criminal proceedings.
11. The respondents have specifically relied upon the principle of grant of provisional pension in terms of the applicable regulations and have pleaded that the applicant has been granted provisional pension (stated to be 50% of basic pay) and that other retiral benefits such as gratuity and the retained portion of leave encashment have been withheld pending outcome of the criminal proceedings, also relying upon legal opinions.
HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 13 :: TA 25/2025
12. In the considered view of this Tribunal, once the factum of pendency of the criminal trial is not in dispute, the respondents are legally justified in adopting the route of provisional pension and withholding those retiral components which, under the governing rules, can be regulated till culmination of judicial proceedings. At the same time, the Tribunal cannot be oblivious to the reality that a retired employee requires sustenance, and prolonged pendency of trial cannot operate as a device to indefinitely deny all meaningful post-retiral support.
13. For the foregoing reasons, the Transfer Application is disposed of with the following directions:
a) The respondents shall ensure that the applicant is paid provisional pension, strictly in accordance with the applicable provisions, regularly and without interruption, and if any arrears of provisional pension are due, the same shall be released within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
b) The respondents shall verify and release, within 12 weeks, any other retiral dues/components, if any, that are admissible even during pendency of criminal proceedings under the governing HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 14 :: TA 25/2025 rules (after due verification), by passing a brief speaking calculation/order.
c) The remaining pensionary/retiral benefits which, under the rules, are required to await the outcome of judicial proceedings (including gratuity and the withheld portion of leave encashment, as pleaded by the respondents) shall remain subject to the final outcome of the criminal case pending trial arising out of FIR alleging offences under Sections 420/467/468/471/34 RPC.
d) Immediately upon conclusion of the criminal trial (acquittal/conviction/otherwise), the respondents shall finalize the applicant's retiral benefits by passing a reasoned/speaking order and shall release the admissible amounts (or take action as per law, as the case may be) within a period of three months from the date a certified copy/communication of the final outcome is produced before the competent authority.
e) It is clarified that the applicant shall be at liberty to approach the respondents with a representation enclosing status of the criminal case and seeking compliance of these directions; and if HARSHIT Digitally signed by YADAV HARSHIT YADAV :: 15 :: TA 25/2025 compliance is not made within the stipulated time, the applicant shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law.
14. The Transfer Application stands disposed of in the above terms. No order as to costs.
(RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA)
Judicial Member
/harshit/
HARSHIT Digitally signed by
YADAV HARSHIT YADAV