Retiral Benefits Cannot Be Withheld Because Of Proceedings Which Do Not Relate To Official Duties: Rajasthan HC

A single judge bench of the Rajasthan High Court comprising of Justice Ganesh Ram Meena while deciding a Civil Writ Petition (“CWP”) in the case of Mahesh Chandra Soni vs State of Rajasthan and Ors. has held that retiral benefits cannot be withheld because of proceedings which do not relate to official duties like family disputes.

Background Facts

Mahesh Chandra Soni (“Petitioner”) was appointed on the post of Male Nurse Grade-II in 1985. The Petitioner superannuated in 2023. However, during the service of the petitioner, criminal cases under Sections 498A & 406 IPC, 1860 and Sections 4 & 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 were lodged by the in-laws of the Petitioner's son against the Petitioner. Although the trial of the aforesaid cases is pending before the trial court, the Assistant Director, Pension and Pensioners' Welfare Department (“Respondent”) passed various orders to stop the process regarding payment of pension and other retiral benefits to the Petitioner. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner filed the present CWP.

The Petitioner contended that the Respondents have withheld the retiral benefits due to the Petitioner merely on account of pendency of trial in a criminal case in regard of a false and fabricated case of demand of dowry. It was further submitted that the Petitioner had been in service for 38 years and had not been subjected to any departmental proceedings for any kind of misconduct.

On the other hand, the Respondents contended that they have rightly withheld the retiral benefits due to the Petitioner in light of Rule 90 of the Rajasthan Pension Rules, 1996 (“Pension Rules”) which states that:

“90. Provisional pension and provisional retirement gratuity where departmental or judicial proceedings are pending

…..

1 (b) The provisional pension shall be authorised by the Director, Pension Department, during the period commencing from the date of retirement upto and including the date on which, after the conclusion of departmental or judicial proceedings, final orders are passed by the competent authority

….”

Findings of the Court

The court observed that the Pension Rules state that pension and gratuity are the amounts credited to the Petitioner on the basis of services rendered by him. Further, the retirement benefits accruing under the Pension Rules cannot be withheld because of any proceedings which do not relate to the official duties, particularly in the matters like family disputes etc.

The court further held that judicial proceedings as referred to in Rule 90 of the Pension Rules relates to any act of an employee committed by him/her in his/ her office or in connection with the official duties.

“The words 'judicial proceedings' as referred in Rule 90 of the Pension Rules, 1996 cannot be treated for the proceedings related to the “family disputes”, which has nothing to do with the official duties or functioning of the employee in his office.”

The court also remarked on the nature of pension and gratuity and held that pension and gratuity are not bounty but constitute a right to property under Article 300A of the Constitution which cannot be deprived except in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observations, the CWP was allowed.

Case No.- Civil Writ Petition No. 14891/2023

Case Name- Mahesh Chandra Soni vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Counsel for the Petitioner- Mr. Harendra Neel and Ms. Sarah Sharma for Mr. Vigyan Shah

Counsel for the Respondent- Dr. Vibhuti Bhushan Sharma with Ms. Malti

Click Here To Read/Download Order