Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18387 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 12681 of 2021 Petitioner :- Ajaz Ali Respondent :- M.D. U.P.Rajya Nirman Sahkari Sangh Limited Lucknow Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhlaq Ali Counsel for Respondent :- Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary,Alok Sharma,Nishi Chaudhary,Rakesh Kumar Chaudhary Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. This petition has been filed through E-mode and learned counsel for the petitioner has provided photocopy of the hard copy, same is taken on record. 2. Sri Alok Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent has also filed photocopy of the hard copy of counter affidavit, same is also taken on record. 3. By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged order dated 29.12.2020 (Annexure-1) whereby the petitioner has been informed that an amount of Rs.2,31,00,000/- and odd is to be recovered from the petitioner and other persons who are to be found responsible for the same. 4. The petitioner has prayed that the opposite party be commanded to release the amount of post retiral benefits payable to the petitioner with an interest at the rate of 12 % from the date of his superannuation i.e. 31.12.2019 till actual payment is made. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that in the impugned order dated 29.12.2020, it has been indicated that matter is pending before the C.B.I. court for alleged aforesaid irregularities and the payment, if any, which is to be made to the petitioner would be given after conclusion of proceedings pending before the C.B.I. court. Notably, after exchange of pleadings, this Court heard the learned counsel for the parties in detail and passed an order dated 02.01.2025, which reads as under: "1. Heard. 2. Under challenge is the order dated 29.12.2020, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, whereby the petitioner has been informed that an amount of Rs.2,31,00,000/- and odd is to be recovered from the petitioner and other persons who are to be found responsible for the same. 3. It has also been indicated in the order impugned that the matter is pending for the aforesaid irregularities before the CBI court and that the payment, if any which is to be made to the petitioner, would be as per the order that may be passed by the CBI court. 4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2019 while working as an Executive Engineer. He was not paid his retiral dues which constrained him to approach this Court by filing Writ Petition No.23264(S/S) of 2020 in Re: Ajaj Ali vs. Managing Director, U.P. Rajya Nirman Nigam Sahkari Samiti, Lucknow. 5. This Court, vide judgment and order dated 01.12.2020, a copy of which is annexure 4 to the petition, disposed of the petition with a direction to the Managing Director of the Corporation to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. 6. In pursuance thereof, vide order dated 29.12.2020, the claim of the petitioner for payment of his retiral dues has been rejected. 7. Shri Rakesh Chaudhary, learned counsel appearing for all the respondents fairly states that there are neither any disciplinary proceedings nor any criminal case pending against the petitioner and even in the case pending in the CBI court, the name of petitioner does not find place and the only ground as has been urged by Shri Chaudhary, for non payment of retiral dues, is the ground which emerges from a perusal of the order impugned dated 29.12.2020 as indicated above. Further Shri Chaudhary states that the petitioner has also been issued with the show cause notice dated 09.06.2021. 8. Shri Chaudhary also states that CSR 351-A has been adopted in the corporation and the petitioner having retired on 31.12.20219, as such, it is within the rights of the Corporation to even issue a charge sheet to the petitioner for the incident which is within four years from the date of issuance of the charge sheet. He also states that he is not aware as to the further decision that may have been taken in the matter after issuance of the show cause notice dated 09.06.2021. 9. Therefore, keeping in view of the arguments as raised by the learned counsels for the parties and from a perusal of the record as well as the averments made in the counter affidavit, it is apparent that no disciplinary proceedings or criminal case is pending against the petitioner at this stage and as such, prima facie there does not appear to be any impediment in payment of retiral dues to the petitioner. 10. However on the request of Shri Chaudhary to seek further instructions pertaining to the action that has been taken in pursuance to the show cause notice, a week's time is granted to him to seek further instructions. 11. As the matter has been heard at substantial length, as such, list this case on 15.01.2025 at 02:15 P.M. for further hearing." 6. In the aforesaid order all finer points relating to the issue in question have been considered thoroughly by this Court. In para-7 of the aforesaid order, the statement of the learned counsel for the respondent has been indicated wherein the then counsel has stated that there are neither any disciplinary proceeding nor any criminal case pending against the petitioner and even in the case pending before the C.B.I. court, the name of the petitioner does not find place. 7. Sri Akhlaq Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner has also informed that chargesheet has been filed by the C.B.I. court, wherein the present petitioner has not been implicated. Trial is going on and the evidence of the prosecution witnesses are being recorded. 8. In para-9 of the aforesaid order, this Court has observed that no disciplinary proceeding or criminal case is pending against the petitioner at this stage, and as such, prima facie there does not appear to be any impediment in payment of retiral dues to the petitioner. 9. The petitioner retired on 31.12.2019 while working as a Executive Engineer and admittedly till his retirement neither any disciplinary proceeding was pending against the petitioner nor he was implicated in any criminal matter in any manner whatsoever, therefore, the petitioner superannuated with his unblemished service record. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that despite the CSR 351-A, having been adopted by the corporation which authorizes the competent authority to issue charge-sheet to any erring employee within 4 years of the incident but no charge-sheet has been issued after expiry of 4 years in terms of CSR 351-A. Therefore, learned counsel has requested that this petition may be allowed. 11. Per contra, Sri Alok Sharma, learned counsel for respondent tried to defend the order dated 29.12.2020, but he could not dispute the aforesaid submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and he could not show any order taking action against the petitioner, if any pursuant to any irregularities, as has been indicated in para- 10 of the order dated 02.01.2025 (supra). 12. Sri Sharma on the basis of his instructions has submitted that the corporation is not having any document showing the culpability of the petitioner in a case pending before the C.B.I. court, but as per Sri Sharma, the culpability of the petitioner may not be denied till the final disposal of the criminal proceedings pending before the C.B.I. court. Therefore, Sri Sharma has stated that the culpability of the petitioner, if any, may be seen after conclusion of the proceedings pending before the C.B.I. court. 13. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material evidence available on record, since this is an admitted position that no disciplinary proceeding or criminal case is pending against the petitioner, his culpability has not been found till date in a criminal proceeding pending before the C.B.I. court, no chargesheet has been issued to the petitioner within a period of 4 years from the incident in question and even after his retirement on 31.12.2019, therefore, there does not appear to any legal impediment in making payment of retiral dues to the petitioner. 14. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. 15. The impugned order dated 29.12.2020 passed by Managing Director, Uttar Pradesh Rajya Nirman Sahkari Sangh Limited (Annexure-1) is hereby set-aside/quashed. 16. The competent opposite party is directed to release the entire amount of post retiral dues to the petitioner with expedition preferably within a period of two months from the receipt of the certified copy of the order of this Court. However, the petitioner would also be entitled for the interest at the rate of 7% on the delayed payment of retiral dues from the date it becomes due till the actual payment thereof is made. 17. It is made clear that the aforesaid payment of retiral dues shall remain subject to the final outcome of the proceedings pending before the C.B.I. court. Order Date :- 2.4.2025 Reena/- (Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench