Pradeep Kumar Gupta vs The State of Bihar

Court
Patna High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1267 of 2025
======================================================
Pradeep Kumar Gupta Son of Ram Nath Prasad Gupta Resident of Flat No.-
103 A, Surya Mahalaxmi Apartment, East Boring Canal Road, P.S.- Buddha
Colony, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government
of Bihar, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinay Ranjan, Adv.
Mr. Abhishek Teerthankar, Adv.
Mr. Utkarsh Rajan, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Shekhar, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Government Pleader (17)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 29-06-2026
Heard Mr. Vinay Ranjan, learned Advocate for the
petitioner and Mr. Amit Bhushan, learned Advocate for the
State.
2. The petitioner, aggrieved with the order as contained
in Memo No. 19285 dated 02.12.2024 to the extent it relates to
withholding off 10% pension, Full Gratuity and Earned leave
issued by the Joint Secretary, General Administration
Department, Government of Bihar, has approached this Court
seeking quashing of the same. The challenge has been made on
the premise that besides the fact that the petitioner has not only
exonerated in the departmental proceeding, the order of sanction

Patna High Court CWJC No.1267 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
2/5
granted by the respondent also came to be quashed vide order
dated 07.07.2025 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No. 2038 of 2024.
3. The matter was heard on 11.09.2025 and this Court
taking note of the aforesaid facts directed the respondents to
ensure payment of all the pensionary benefits/outstanding dues
in accordance with the law if no impediment, otherwise comes
in the way of extending the benefits.
4. In pursuant to the order of this Court, a supplementary
counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.
2. It is specifically contended that there is no confrontation that
vide order dated 07.07.2025, a bench of this Court in Cr.WJC
No. 2038 of 2024 has quashed the Memo No. 53 dated
20.05.2020 issued by the Secretary to the Government Law
Department, Bihar, whereby sanction has been accorded to
prosecute against the petitioner, but while quashing the same the
State was also given a liberty to pass a fresh sanction order in
accordance with law.
5. In the light of the liberty aforesaid, the case of the
petitioner with regard to sanction for prosecution was
considered afresh and vide order no 250 dated 25.09.2025 the
Law Department, Government of Bihar has once again issued
the sanction order for prosecution against the petitioner. The

Patna High Court CWJC No.1267 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
3/5
aforesaid sanction order for prosecution has also been brought
on record by way of Annexure B to the supplementary counter
affidavit.
6. On the strength of the aforesaid letter Mr. Prashant
Bhushan, learned Advocate for the State submitted that there is
no error in withholding of 10% of pension and 100% of gratuity
in as well as earned leave.
7. Mr. Vinay Ranjan, dispelling the aforesaid contention
has straightway drawn the attention of this Court to the
explanation Rule 43(b) (i) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 and
submitted that for the purposes of the rule, a judicial proceeding
shall be deemed to have been instituted, in the case of criminal
proceeding, on the date of which complaint is made or charge
sheet is submitted, to a criminal Court. A supplementary counter
affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the petitioner and a
categorical averment has been made in paragraph no. 5 that in
the present case till date even a charge sheet has not been
submitted against the petitioner before the competent Court. He
further drew the attention of this Court to the Notification No.
9217 dated 25.05.2026 issued under the signature of the
Principle Secretary General Administrative Department, Bihar,
Patna, wherein the Government has clarified that the pendency

Patna High Court CWJC No.1267 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
4/5
of criminal case against a Government employee shall be treated
to be commenced from the date of framing of the charge by the
competent Court and not from the date of registration of FIR or
sanction of prosecution.
8. In view thereof he thus submits that since neither
there is a departmental proceeding pending against the petitioner
nor the judicial proceeding has commenced in terms with the
provisions of law, the petitioner is entitled to get all the
remaining 10% of pension, Full Gratuity and the Earned leave
along with other consequential benefits.
9. After having heard the learned Advocate for the
respective parties, this Court finds substance in the submission
advanced by learned Advocate for the petitioner. The Bihar
Pension Rules especially Rule 43b, (Explanation b) (i) clearly
says that the judicial proceeding shall be deemed to have been
initiated only when a complaint is made or charge sheet is
submitted to a Criminal Court. The State Government has also
clarified the position with regard to the initiation of judicial
proceeding against a Government employee and bare reading of
which it clearly appears to this Court that a judicial proceeding
shall be deemed to have been initiated once the charges are
framed.

Patna High Court CWJC No.1267 of 2025 dt.29-06-2026
5/5
10. Once the state itself has clarified the aforesaid
position by issuing a resolution recently on 25.05.2026 and the
petitioner has made a specific averment that till date even the
charge sheet has not been submitted, in such circumstances this
court is left with no option, but to direct the respondent no. 2 to
consider the claim of the petitioner for payment of 10% of
pension, full gratuity and Earned leave, besides other
consequential benefits preferably within a period of four weeks
from today, in the light of the resolution dated 25.05.2026.
11. It is made clear that if the case of the petitioner is
fully covered under the aforesaid resolution all the payment
shall be made without any further delay within a further period
of four weeks.
12. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
present writ petition stands disposed off.

(Harish Kumar, J)
sumit/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date
Transmission Date NA