IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.36477 of 2025 Damodar Mohapatra …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Garnayak, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. A. Tripathy, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 13.01.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “The petitioner therefore prays that in the facts and circumstances stated above, this Hon'ble court may be graciously pleased to admit the writ petition, issue notice to the opposite parties, call for the records from the opposite parties if necessary and after hearing the parties to this writ petition, this Hon'ble Court may be graciously be pleased to issue an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the opposite parties for disbursement of Provisional Pension in favour of the petitioner by quashing the Proposed Final order dtd. 30.10.2023 passed by the opposite party no. 4 under Annexure No. 5 and subsequent Letter No. 40336 dtd. 22.9.2025 under Annexure No. 6 within a time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court for the ends of justice.” 4. It is contended that on his conviction in a Vigilance Proceeding, petitioner though has moved an appeal before this Court in CRLA No.3 of 2018 and this Court has allowed him to go on bail but on the face of the pendency of the appeal against and the impugned order of conviction so passed by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance) in Balasore Vigilance P.S. Case No.39 dated 20.10.1997, Govt.-Opp. Party No.1 vide impugned communication dated 14.10.2025 under Annexure-6, has directed to withhold the pension of the petitioner permanently. 4.1. It is contended that since against the order of conviction and sentence, petitioner has already moved an appeal before this Court which is pending adjudication, during pendency of the appeal, no such order could have been passed and the same accordingly requires interference of this Court. 5. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that since petitioner has been convicted and sentenced in the Vigilance Proceeding and while admitting the appeal, this Court has not stayed the order of conviction and sentence, in view of the provisions contained under Rule-6 vis-à-vis Rule-7 of OCS(Pension) Rules, 1992, petitioner is not eligible and entitled to get the benefit of pension any more. Rule-6 and 7 of the Rules reads as follows:- “6.Pension Subject to Future Good Conduct- (1) Future good conduct shall be an implied condition of every grant of pension and its continuance under these rules. (2) The pension sanctioning authority may by order in writing, withhold or withdraw a pension or part thereof, whether permanently or for a specified period, if the pensioner is convicted of a serious crime or is found guilty of grave misconduct; Provided that no such order shall be passed by an authority subordinate to the authority competent to make an appointment to the post held by the pensioner immediately before his retirement from service: Provided further that where a part of pension is withheld or withdrawn, the amount of such pension shall not be reduced below the amount of minimum limit. (3) Where a pensioner is convicted of a serious crime by a Court of Law, action under sub-rule (1) shall be taken in the light of the judgment of the Court relating to such conviction. (4) In a case not falling under sub-rule (3), if the authority referred to in sub-rule (2), considers that the pensioner is prima facie guilty of grave misconduct, it shall before passing an order under such rule (2)- (a) serve upon the pensioner a notice specifying the action proposed to be taken against him and the ground on which it is proposed to be taken and calling upon him to submit, within fifteen days of the receipt of the notice or such further time as may be allowed by the pension sanctioning authority, such representation as he may wish to make against the proposal; and (b) take into consideration the representation, if any, submitted by the pensioner under clause (a) (5) Where the authority competent to pass an order under sub-rule (2) is the Government, the Odisha Public Service Commission shall be consulted before the order is passed. (6) An appeal against an order under sub-rule (2), passed by any authority other than the Governor shall lie to the Governor and the Governor shall, in consultation with the Odisha Public Service Commission, pass such orders on the appeal as he deems fit. 7. Right of Government to Withhold or Withdraw Pension- (1) The Government reserve to themselves the right of withholding a pension or gratuity, or both either in full or in part, or withdrawing a pension in full or in part. whether permanently or for specified period and of ordering recovery from a pension or gratuity of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to the Government, if in any departmental or judicial proceedings, the pensioner is found guilty of grave misconduct or negligence in duty during the period of his service including service rendered on re- employment after retirement: Provided that the Odisha Public Service Commission shall be consulted before any final orders are passed: Provided further that when a part of pension is withheld / withdrawn, the amount of such pension shall not be reduced below the amount of minimum limit. (2) (a) Such departmental proceedings referred to in sub-rule (1), if instituted while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his reemployment, shall, after the final retirement of the Government servant, be deemed to be a proceedings under this rule and shall be continued and concluded by the authority by which they were commenced in the same manner as if the Government servant had continued in service: Provided that when the departmental proceedings are instituted by an authority, subordinate to Government that authority shall submit a report recording its findings to the Government. (b) such departmental proceedings as referred to in sub-rule (1) if not instituted while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his reemployment- (i) shall not be instituted save with the sanction of Government; (ii) shall not be in respect of any event which took place more than four years before such institution ; and (iii) shall be conducted by such authority and in such place as the Government may, direct and in accordance with the procedure applicable to departmental proceedings in which an order of dismissal from service could be made in relation to the Government servant during his service; (c) [deleted] Vide Finance Department Notification No.33464/F., dtd.04.08.2006 (d) In the case of Government servant who has retired on attaining the age of superannuation or otherwise and against whom any departmental or judicial proceedings are instituted or where departmental proceeding are instituted or where departmental proceedings are continued under clauses (a) and (b), a provisional pension as provided in rule 66 shall be sanctioned. (e) Where the Government decide not to withhold or withdraw pension but order recovery of pecuniary loss from pension, the recovery shall not ordinarily be made at a rate exceeding one-third of the pension admissible on the date of retirement of a Government servant.” 5.1. It is accordingly contended that no illegality or irregularity can be found with the impugned order. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that the impugned order has been passed after the petitioner was convicted in Balasore P.S. Case No.39 dated 20.10.1997. Since in the appeal filed by the petitioner against such order of conviction and sentence, this Court while admitting the appeal, has not stayed the order of conviction and sentence which is not disputed, this Court is of the view that no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the authority in directing for stoppage of the pension of the petitioner permanently to the extent of 100% vide the impugned communication dated 14.10.2025 under Annexure-6, taking recourse to the provision contained under Rule-6 & 7 of the Rules. 6.1. However, such withholding of pension under Annexure-5 shall be subject to final outcome of the criminal appeal. It is open for the petitioner to take appropriate step for early disposal of the appeal. 7. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev