Right of govt to withhold a part of pension and/or gratuity during the pendency of departmental/criminal proceedings

Supreme Court: While deciding a case pertaining to the question of the power of the State Government to withhold a part of pension and/or gratuity during the pendency of departmental/criminal proceedings in the absence of any provision in the Pension Rules, the Court, while relying on Deokinandan Prasad vs. State of Bihar; (1971) 2 SCC 330 and West Bengal v. Haresh C. Banerjee and Ors. (2006) 7 SCC 651 held that the right to receive pension is recognized as the right to “property” and accordingly a person cannot be deprived of his pension without the authority of law , which is the Constitutional mandate enshrined in Article 300- A of the Constitution. The Court while denying the claim of the petitioner that administrative instructions can permit the withholding of a part of pension and gratuity in rules that are silent on a particular aspect, said that the executive instructions do not have statutory character and therefore, cannot be termed as law within the meaning of Article 300A. The Court therefore, held that the pension and/or gratuity cannot be withheld under the umbrage of administrative instruction. [State of Jharkhand v. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava, Civil Appeal No. 6770 of 2013, decided on August 14, 2013]

Print Page