HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 12889 of 2025 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, J. HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR, J. 1. Heard Shri Sudarshan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. 2. The present writ petition has been filed assailing the order dated 15.10.2024 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad in Original Application No. 293 of 2021 whereby the application of the first respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the employee') has been allowed and the order under challenge before the Tribunal dated 11.06.2020 has been quashed. The competent authority has been directed to release the Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) of the employee forthwith. 3. The facts in brief are that the employee while in service of the petitioners as Chief Workshop Manager, Gorakhpur was charged of shortage of 15 number of angles based on handing over and taking over note of BRI/Sonepur dated 12.05.1994. A case was registered against him under Section 3 of the Railway Property Act, in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Sonepur as TR no. 213/2003. By order dated 18.05.2018 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepur, the employee was exonerated of the charges leveled against him. The employee retired on 31.08.2010. However, DCRG was withheld on the ground of pendency of Criminal Appeal no. 129 of 2018 filed by the Department before the Patna High Court. 4. The employee preferred a claim petition under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 and it has been allowed by the impugned Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : Union Of India And Another .....Petitioner(s) Sri Mohammad Naseem And Another .....Respondent(s) order holding that Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 2018 cannot be said to be pending inasmuch as it was last listed before the court on 02.04.2018 and on that date, petitioners were granted time to rectify defects in the appeal. Since, the defects were not removed, the appeal was deemed to be dismissed. The employee has obtained the status of the case on 21.03.2021, which showed that the appeal stands disposed of. The Tribunal also held that the incident relates to the year 1996 and the Department did not initiate any disciplinary proceeding against the employee rather permitted the employee to continue in service and he superannuated on 31.08.2010. For withholding gratuity, the petitioners were under mandate of law to hold that the retired employee would be guilty or is under trial for a serious crime. The nature and seriousness of the offence was required to be examined. However, the employee was allowed to continue even though the department knew of pendency of criminal case. It has been held that the proceedings of criminal appeal stands concluded on 18.02.2018, and thus, the order of acquittal passed by the Magistrate stands upheld. The Tribunal also took notice of the fact that in case of two similarly situated persons, the Tribunal vide order dated 22.11.2021 in OA No. 1220 of 2017 and in other case bearing OA No. 1097 of 2022 vide order dated 21.08.2024, has granted relief to the employees therein. It has also been noted that in another similar case, i.e., Union of India and Anr. Vs. Prabhu Lal decided on 25.01.2010, the order of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Delhi High Court. Accordingly, the Tribunal has directed the petitioners to release DCRG to the employee. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners is not in position to dispute that criminal appeal filed by the department before the Patna High Court would be deemed to have been disposed of on 18.05.2018, the date on which the time granted to rectify the defects expired and the defects were not removed. Even status of the case dated 21.03.2021 filed by the employee reveals that the appeal stands disposed of. 6. Under Rule 10(1)(c) of Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, the power to withhold gratuity is until the conclusion of departmental proceedings or judicial proceedings. The said Rule is as follows: "No gratuity shall be paid to the railway servant until the conclusion of the departmental or judicial proceedings and issue of final orders thereon; provided that where departmental proceedings have been instituted under the provisions of the WRIA No. 12889 of 2025 2 Railway Servants Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1968, for imposing any of the penalties specified in clauses (i), (ii), (iii a) and (iv) of rule 6 of the said rules, the payment of gratuity shall be authorised to be paid to the railway servant." 7. In the facts noted above, we uphold the findings of the Tribunal that criminal proceeding would be deemed to have been concluded with the acquittal of the employee by the learned Magistrate and thereafter dismissal of the criminal appeal by the Patna High Court on account of the petitioners failing to remove the defects therein. 8. The Tribunal has rightly held that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the department cannot be permitted to withhold the DCRG. 9. We find no merit in the instant writ petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed. September 16, 2025 Mukesh Kr. WRIA No. 12889 of 2025 3 (Arun Kumar,J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad