HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 13852 of 2021 Court No. - 25 HON'BLE AMITABH KUMAR RAI, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel, who appears on behalf of State-respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. The present writ petition has been filed claiming gratuity, as the petitioner retired from the post of Sub Inspector on 31.07.2017. 3. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that, though pension is being paid to the petitioner, gratuity is not being paid solely on the ground that a criminal case, i.e., Case Crime No.545 of 1989 under Sections 223, 224 I.P.C., is pending trial before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardoi. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment passed in the case of State of U.P. and others vs. Jai Prakash passed in Special Appeal Defective No.1278 of 2013 decided on 17.12.2013 and the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Shivagopal and others vs. State of U.P. and 4 others, passed in leading Special Appeal No.40 of 2017 decided on 08.05.2019 and contended that the mere pendency of a criminal case cannot be a hurdle in the grant of gratuity to the petitioner. 5. Be that as it may, the Full Bench, while answering the reference, came to the following conclusions, which are mentioned in para 78 : "78. In view of the foregoing discussions, we arrive at the following conclusions: (i) Future good conduct is implied condition of ever grant of pension. Full pension is Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashish Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ram Bahadur Awasthi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow And Ors. .....Respondent(s) not to be given as a matter of course, or unless the service rendered has been thoroughly satisfactory. (Article 351/351-A) (ii) Article 351 and/or 351-A can be invoked by the State Government or the Governor, as the case may be, if the pensioner (a) be convicted of serious crime; (b) be guilty of grave misconduct (c) caused pecuniary loss to the government in service. The power can be exercised in either of the eventualities. The action thereunder is punitive. (iii) Pendency of disciplinary/judicial proceedings on the date of retirement, or instituted after retirement, provisional pension equal to maximum pension as mandated under Article 919-A may be sanctioned to the government servant for the period upto conclusion of the proceedings. (Article 351-AA/Article 919-A(1)/(2)) (iv) No gratuity is payable to the government servant during pendency of disciplinary/judicial proceedings/enquiry by Administrative Tribunal, until conclusion of the proceedings/enquiry and orders being passed thereon by the competent authority. [Article 919 A(3)] (v) The Regulations mandates that government servant is entitled to provisional pension equal to maximum pension during pendency of the proceedings until conclusion. The Regulations does not mandate the entitlement of full pension/gratuity on the ground of 'hardship' being faced by the pensioner pending proceedings. (vi) The nature of the charge/allegations against the government servant cannot be gone into during pendency of the proceedings. The government servant whether guilty of 'serious crime' and/or 'grave misconduct' in the opinion of the competent authority can be assessed/considered while passing final orders upon conclusion of the disciplinary/judicial proceedings. (vii) On combined reading of Article 351, 351-A, 351-AA and 919-A, the impact on pension/gratuity would arise after the competent authority has had the occasion to consider and issue final orders upon conclusion of the proceedings. The cause to the government servant arises thereafter and not at the stage pending proceedings/enquiry. " 6. It has been informed that no restraint order is there denying gratuity to the petitioner and the petitioner is suffering as, after retirement in 2017 till date, the gratuity has been withheld. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, no purpose would be served in keeping the present writ petition pending. 8. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2, Inspector General of Police, Lucknow Zone, District Lucknow to take a WRIA No. 13852 of 2021 2 decision after seeking approval from the competent level with respect to grant of gratuity to the petitioner, in light of the stipulations contained in Shivagopal and others (supra), which has been reproduced hereinabove, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. October 16, 2025 Shubhankar WRIA No. 13852 of 2021 3 (Amitabh Kumar Rai,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHUBHANKAR THAKUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench