Gauhati HC: DRT Has to Dispose of Application under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act as per RDB Act  ||  Kerala HC: Showing or Waving Black Flag to a Person Cannot Amount to Defamation  ||  Del. HC: Merit Based Review of Arb. Award Involving Reappraisal of Factual Findings is Impermissible  ||  Del. HC: It is the Product and Not the Technology Used that Determines HSN Classification  ||  P&H HC: Provis. of Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen (First Amendment) Rules are Unconstitutional  ||  Cal HC: High Time that Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage be Read as Grounds of Desertion & Cruelty  ||  Supreme Court: Third Party Can File SLP Against Quashing Of Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Absolute Ownership in Property as Per HSA Can’t be Claimed by Woman with Limited Interest  ||  SC: Can’t Forego Fundamental Requirements of Election of Society in Absence of Specific Provisions  ||  SC: Special Efforts Should be Made to Identify Women Prisoners Eligible for Release u/s 479 of BNSS    

State of West Bengal and ors. v. Aswini Kumar Mahato - (Supreme Court) (23 Jun 2016)

Government employee can face pension cuts if found guilty in department inquiry

Service

A person found to have caused pecuniary loss to an authority by reason of misconduct or negligence can be punished despite having reached the age of superannuation, so long as department proceedings commenced prior to his retirement.

The Supreme Court was confronted with the query: whether pension can be reduced after a person reaches the age of superannuation, as result of a department mental inquiry finding him culpable for pecuniary loss. In an earlier ruling the Calcutta High Court had held the master-servant relationship to have ceased after the employee reached retirement age. And by the West Bengal Service (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules 1971, once an employee was allowed to retire having attained the age of superannuation, government authority had no jurisdiction to pass an order in a disciplinary proceeding.

A two-judge bench of Justices Goel and Khanwilkar, however, readily accepted the arguments of the Appellant: pension could yet be withheld if pecuniary loss was caused by the employee. They reiterated that departmental proceedings could continue not only in instances of pecuniary loss but also of “grave misconduct or negligence”.

Relevant : State of West Bengal & Ors. v. Pronab Chakraborty MANU/SC/0998/2014

Tags : DEPARTMENTAL INQUIRY   FORMER EMPLOYEE   PENSION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved