Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88408 Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11311 of 2018 Petitioner :- Punnwasi Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Anand Kumar Singh,Nikhil Kumar,Shri Prakash Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the contesting respondents. 2. The writ petition is filed for mandamus directing the respondent no. 4 to take final decision upon the application of the petitioner filed on 01.07.2017 to pay the post retiral dues to him including GPF amount along with the interest. 3. The petitioner was appointed as Class-IV employee in the Government Polytechnic Mirzapur on 31.12.1967 and after attaining the age of superannuation the petitioner was retired on 30.12.2006. During course of employment the petitioner was involved in a crime which was registered as Case Crime No. 45 of 2000 and the petitioner was arrested on 24.09.2000 and was released on bail on 31.07.2001 and the services of the petitioner was suspended during the said period and subsistence allowance was paid. 4. Subsequently, the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Mirzapur has convicted the petitioner in the aforesaid crime and against that the petitioner preferred an appeal and the said appeal, bearing no. 4575 of 2005, is pending for disposal before this Hon'ble Court. 5. Consequent on retirement, the respondents have not released the retrial benefits and GPF, hence the petitioner has made a representation to the third respondent on 02.12.2006 when the same was not addressed by the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing of the present writ petition. During the pendency of the present writ petition, the petitioner had died and by allowing substitution application, vide order dated 27.04.2022, his heir i.e the present petitioner is being impleaded. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that except initiation of a criminal case the department has not initiated any disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and no orders have been passed and in the said circumstances the petitioner is entitled for retiral benefits, except embargo incorporated in Rule 351 and 351A of Civil Service Regulations Rules. The authorities can hold the pension for conviction in serious crimes or of grave misconduct that should be done only by way of taking a decision and communicating the decision to the employee. But in the instant case the respondents have neither passed any order nor communicated the same to the petitioner. Further learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a case decided by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ-A No. 7427 of 2020 vide order dated 26.07.2021 where identical issue was involved. This Court by relying on Regulations 351-A has passed the order and relevant part of the same is reproduced hereinafter:- "9. The admitted facts, in the present case, are judicial proceeding was instituted against the petitioner prior to his retirement on 30.11.2012 which resulted in conviction on 18.5.2019. Till then, the petitioner was being paid the provisional pension. The admitted facts are that no proceedings have been initiated for recovery of any loss caused to the Government in terms of the mandate of the Regulation 351-A of the CSR Regulations and no orders have been passed with regard to pension of the petitioner by the Governor. There is nothing on record to demonstrate that the Governor has initiated or is in the process of initiating any proceedings for recovery of any pecuniary loss caused to the Government. Once that is the case, the recourse to Regulations 351-A cannot be taken for an indefinite period although the respondents were justified in paying the provisional pension during the pendency of the judicial proceedings. After the judicial proceedings came to an end, the Governor could have taken recourse for institution of proceedings for recovery or for determination of the loss allegedly caused to the Government which has not been done, as such, after the culmination of proceedings, the withholding of the pension and GPF is not justified in law. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to pay the final pension from date of retirement and other retiral dues including gratuity to the petitioner after deducting the provisional pension paid to the petitioner within a period of three months from today alongwith interest @ 6% per annum on the dues payable to the petitioner as directed above with effect from 18.5.2019 (the date of conviction) till payment/realization." 7. The facts in the above writ petition are identical to the instant case, hence learned counsel for the petitioner requested to pass the same order. 8. After getting the notice the respondents have filed counter affidavit but in the counter affidavit they have not stated anything about the decision, only in view of involvement of the petitioner in a serious crime and in view of conviction he is not entitled for the pension but as contended by the petitioner no such decision has been taken by the Government, hence without taking any decision they cannot hold the pensionary benefits. 9. Considering the submissions and on perusal of the records, as the respondent have not taken any decision as per Regulations 351 and 351-A, there is a direction to the respondent to calculate and release all the pensionary benefits to the petitioner within a period of two months, from the date of receiving of certified copy of the order. 10. With aforesaid observations, this petition finally stands disposed of. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Saurabh (Donadi Ramesh, J.) Digitally signed by :- SAURABH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad