JUDGMENT : Robin Phukan, J. Heard Mr. T. T. Tara, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. G. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State respondents No.1 and 2; Mr. T. Tagum, learned Standing Counsel for the Education Department representing respondent No.3 as well as Mr. M. Kato, learned Dy.S.G.I. for the CBI representing respondent No.4. 2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuing direction, particularly to the respondent No. 2 to issue a Vigilance Clearance Certificate, so as to enable the Department of Personnel to process his pensionary benefits. 3. Mr. Tara, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was serving as Principal attached to the office of the D.D.S.E., Pasighat, Education Department, Government of Arunachal Pradesh, and he retired from service on superannuation on 31.05.2024. He also submits that though the petitioner has submitted his pension papers, the same could not be processed due to want of a Vigilance Clearance Report from the Vigilance Department and on account of the same, the petitioner has been suffering considerable hardship. He further submits that the right to pension and pensionary benefits is a constitutional right protected under Article 300A of the Constitution of India and the C.C.S. (Pension) Rules, 1972. 3.1 Mr. Tara, further submits that the Vigilance Department has not issued the Vigilance Clearance Certificate on account of the petitioner being arrested by the C.B.I. in C.B.I. P.S. Case No. RC-172022A0009, registered under Sections 406 /407/409/120B of the IPC read with Sections 7 /8/13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in connection with the infamous APPSC paper leakage case. Subsequently, vide order dated 10.01.2023, the petitioner was granted bail by the learned Special Judge (P.C.A.), Yupia in B.A. No. 06 of 2022. Thereafter, a departmental proceeding was initiated against him by serving a memorandum of charges dated 27.01.2023, and he was placed under suspension. However, the said suspension order was interfered with by this Court in WP(C) No. 454(AP) of 2023, vide order dated 18.03.2024, and thereafter, the Commissioner (Education), Government of Arunachal Pradesh, revoked his suspension and attached him to the office of the D.D.S.E., Pasighat, East Siang District. 3.2 Mr. Tara, also submits that the contention of the Vigilance Department is that, as per the Vigilance Manual, a report has to be called for from the Investigating Officer. 3.2 Mr. Tara, also submits that the contention of the Vigilance Department is that, as per the Vigilance Manual, a report has to be called for from the Investigating Officer. Accordingly, a report was sought for from the C.B.I., the Investigating Agency, which has also been impleaded in the present petition as respondent No. 4 and it has filed an affidavit-in-opposition also. 3.3 Drawing the attention of this Court to paragraph No. 7 of the affidavit filed by the C.B.I., Mr. Tara, submits that the petitioner was not charge-sheeted by the C.B.I., and his name has been kept in Column No. 12 of the charge-sheet due to lack of sufficient evidence. However, his son, Shri Loth Ezing and his wife, Smti Pasang Kotin Ezing, have been charge-sheeted in the said case. Mr. Tara, therefore, submits that since the petitioner has not been charge-sheeted by the C.B.I., there is no bar in issuing a Vigilance Clearance Certificate by the Vigilance Department and as such, he contended that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities, particularly respondent No. 2, to issue the Vigilance Clearance Certificate to the petitioner within a period of 7 (seven) days from today, so that the concerned Department can process the pension papers of the petitioner. 4. Per contra, Ms. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the State respondents No. 1 and 2 submits that since the petitioner has not been charge-sheeted by the C.B.I., there may not be any bar in issuing the Vigilance Clearance Certificate. However, she submits that at least 2(two) weeks’ time may be granted to the respondent No. 2 to issue the Vigilance Clearance Certificate to the petitioner. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Kato, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India also submits that in view of the statements and the averments made by the respondent No. 4 in the affidavit-in-opposition filed, particularly in paragraph No. 7, the petitioner has not been charge-sheeted due to lack of sufficient evidence. However, he has drawn the attention of this Court to paragraph No. 13 of the affidavit-in-opposition of the C.B.I., wherein it is stated that the name of the petitioner has been kept in Column No. 12 of the charge-sheet. He further submits that if any material is found in future, the Investigating Agency may proceed against him in accordance with law. 6. He further submits that if any material is found in future, the Investigating Agency may proceed against him in accordance with law. 6. Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record. 7. The basic facts of the present petition are not in dispute. The petitioner, while serving as a Principal was arrested by the C.B.I. on 05.10.2022 in connection with C.B.I. P.S. Case No. RC-172022A0009, registered under Sections 406 /407/409/120B of the IPC , read with Sections 7 /8/13 of the P.C. Act, 1988. Subsequently, he was granted bail by the Court of the learned Special Judge (P.C.A.), Yupia, in B.A. No. 06 of 2022 on 10.01.2023. The petitioner was also placed under suspension by the Department and a memorandum of charges dated 27.01.2023 was served upon him. Thereafter, on account of the non-revocation of his suspension order, the petitioner filed a writ petition, being WP(C) No. 454(AP) of 2023, and vide order dated 18.03.2024, this Court had interfered with the suspension order dated 18.10.2022. Pursuant thereto, by order dated 06.05.2024, the Commissioner (Education), Government of Arunachal Pradesh, revoked the suspension order of the petitioner and attached him to the office of the D.D.S.E., Pasighat, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. After joining the said assignment, the petitioner superannuated from service on 31.05.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted his pension papers to the Department; however, the same could not be processed due to want of a Vigilance Clearance Certificate. 8. It further appears that the C.B.I., the respondent No. 4, had carried out the investigation in connection with the aforesaid case and the investigation culminated in the submission of a charge-sheet in the aforesaid C.B.I. P.S. Case No. RC-172022A0009, registered under Sections 406 /407/409/120B of the IPC , read with Sections 7 /8/13 of the P.C. Act, 1988. However, no charge-sheet was filed against the present petitioner, and his name has been kept only in Column No. 12 of the charge-sheet for want of sufficient evidence. 9. Since the petitioner has not been charge-sheeted in the aforementioned case, there appears to be no bar in issuing the Vigilance Clearance Certificate by the respondent No. 2. Ms. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, also rightly submits that now there is no impediment in issuing the Vigilance Clearance Certificate to the petitioner. 10. 9. Since the petitioner has not been charge-sheeted in the aforementioned case, there appears to be no bar in issuing the Vigilance Clearance Certificate by the respondent No. 2. Ms. Ete, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, also rightly submits that now there is no impediment in issuing the Vigilance Clearance Certificate to the petitioner. 10. Under the given facts and circumstances, and in view of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court is inclined to dispose of the present petition with the following directions: (i) The respondent No. 2, Secretary (Vigilance), Government of Arunachal Pradesh shall issue the Vigilance Clearance Certificate to the petitioner within a period of 2 (two) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order; (ii) Upon receipt of the same, the respondents No. 1 and 3 shall process the pension papers, so submitted by the petitioner and complete the entire process within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of the Vigilance Clearance Certificate from the respondent No. 2; and (iii) The petitioner shall obtain a certified copy of this order and place the same before the respondent No.2 within a period of one week from today. 11. In terms of above, the instant writ petition is disposed of leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s).