Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, V. Vijayaraghavan, joined the Transport Department of the Government of Puducherry as an Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector in 1984. He was promoted to Assistant Engineer in 2001 and was officiating as Regional Transport Officer, Karaikkal. The Central Bureau of Investigation registered an FIR against him under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, for demanding a bribe. He was suspended on 12.07.2010, and the suspension was revoked on 22.08.2011. The trial court convicted him on 06.03.2012 in Special C.C.No.1 of 2010. He filed Criminal Appeal No. 185 of 2012 before the Madras High Court. While the appeal was pending, he attained superannuation on 30.09.2013 and was removed from service under Rule 19(1) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. The High Court allowed the criminal appeal on 18.01.2018, acquitting him of all charges. The petitioner then sought revocation of the removal order and payment of pensionary benefits, but the respondents did not accede. He filed O.A.No. 506 of 2023 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai, which dismissed it on 12.03.2025. Aggrieved, he filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The legal issues were whether the petitioner was entitled to pensionary benefits from the date of superannuation despite the removal order, and whether the Tribunal erred in dismissing the application. The petitioner argued that upon acquittal, the removal order became void and he should be treated as having retired normally. The respondents contended that the removal was a separate disciplinary action and not solely based on conviction. The court analyzed that the removal was directly consequent to the conviction, and upon acquittal, the foundation for removal disappeared. The court held that the petitioner is entitled to all pensionary and retirement benefits as if he had retired on 30.09.2013, and directed the respondents to compute and pay the benefits within eight weeks. The writ petition was allowed, and the Tribunal's order was set aside.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pensionary Benefits - Acquittal in Criminal Case - Petitioner removed from service under Rule 19(1) CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 after conviction under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - High Court acquitted him in appeal - Held that upon acquittal, the removal order loses its foundation and the petitioner is entitled to full pension and retirement benefits from the date of superannuation (30.09.2013) (Paras 1-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, who was removed from service upon conviction but later acquitted by the High Court, is entitled to pensionary and retirement benefits from the date of superannuation.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai, dated 12.03.2025 in O.A.No. 506 of 2023 is set aside. The respondents are directed to compute and pay all pensionary and retirement benefits to the petitioner as if he had retired on 30.09.2013, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Law Points
- Pensionary benefits cannot be withheld after acquittal in criminal case
- Removal from service based on conviction lapses upon acquittal
- Rule 19(1) CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 does not bar grant of pension after acquittal
- Article 226 of Constitution of India can be invoked for pensionary benefits
