[Bihar Pension Rules] Employer Cannot Withhold Retirement Benefits If There Is No Pending Departmental Proceedings: Patna High Court
The Patna High Court observed withholding of pension and other benefits of a retired employee was unlawful in absence of any pending departmental proceedings against the retired employee under the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950.Justice Nani Tagia was considering the case of the Petitioner who retired in 2020 from the post of Programme Officer, Education Department. The petitioner received 90%...
The Patna High Court observed withholding of pension and other benefits of a retired employee was unlawful in absence of any pending departmental proceedings against the retired employee under the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950.
Justice Nani Tagia was considering the case of the Petitioner who retired in 2020 from the post of Programme Officer, Education Department. The petitioner received 90% of gratuity and only received 90% of the pension. Respondents withheld the remaining retirement benefits i.e., 10% gratuity and pension.
The respondent authorities claimed that the petitioner forwarded the names of candidates from Muslim general category against the reserved posts of Extremely Backward Muslim community to be appointed as volunteer teachers in violation of the guidelines. In the counter-affidavit, the Education Department/respondent-3 had stated that they would take action against the petitioner as soon as a necessary decision is taken.
The petitioner contended that an employer can withhold 10% of the gratuity or pension of the retired employee only if there is a departmental proceeding pending against the employee as per Rule 43(b) and 43(c) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950. Since, there was no pending proceedings against him, the respondent authorities cannot withhold his retirement benefits.
The High Court noted that there was communication among various authorities within the education department regarding initiation of action against the petitioner. However, there was no actual departmental proceeding instituted against the petitioner.
“Though there is a narration of exchange of communication between the various authorities of the education department as regards the allegation against the petitioner and the further action to be initated/taken against the petitioner, but the counter affidavit does not indicate that any departmental proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner for the allegation levelled against him” it stated.
The Court observed that respondent authorities failed to specify in the counter affidavit whether they initiated any departmental proceedings against the petitioner. Further, even when provided the opportunity to submit supplementary affidavit, they did not mention if there was any pending proceedings against the petitioner.
The Court noted that, under the Bihar Pension Rules, the respondent authorities have the power to withhold pension benefits. However, as they did not disclose whether any departmental proceedings were pending against the petitioner, they did not have the power to withhold the benefits.
The High Court held that withholding of 10% of the gratuity and pension of the petitioner is not in accordance with the law. It directed the respondents to pay the remaining 10% of gratuity and pension along with any remaining arrears.
Case title: Jai Jai Ram Roy vs. The State of Bihar & Ors., CWJC No.16108 of 2023
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Pat) 48