Pending judicial proceedings bar gratuity and pension commutation, but leave encashment may be released absent recoverable dues.

The applicant, a DANICS officer, retired on superannuation on 31 March 2019.

The respondents withheld his gratuity, commuted value of pension and leave encashment because criminal proceedings were pending against him; he sought release of those benefits with interest.

In one CBI case, he had been acquitted, but the High Court had granted leave to appeal against the acquittal and the appeal remained pending.

In a separate CBI case, the charge sheet had been filed in 2012; charges were subsequently framed against him, including charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the IPC and for alleged receipt of illegal gratification.

No departmental proceedings had been initiated against him.

Whether the applicant was entitled to payment of gratuity while criminal proceedings, including an appeal against his acquittal, remained pending.

Whether the applicant was entitled to commute a portion of his pension during the pendency of those proceedings.

Whether the respondents could withhold the applicant’s leave encashment, and whether it should be released in the circumstances.

Rule 69(1)(c) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 bars payment of gratuity until the conclusion of departmental or judicial proceedings and the issuance of final orders.

For purposes of Rule 9, the Tribunal treated the filing of the final report in the criminal case as attracting the bar on payment of gratuity.

Rule 4 of the CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rules bars commutation of pension during the pendency of departmental or judicial proceedings.

Rule 39(3) of the CCS (Leave) Rules permits withholding all or part of the cash equivalent of earned leave where proceedings are pending and the competent authority considers that money may become recoverable from the employee; the withheld amount becomes payable after the proceedings, subject to adjustment of government dues.

The Tribunal distinguished Union of India v. S. Janaki Raman, relied on by the applicant, as concerning promotion rather than entitlement to retirement benefits during pending criminal proceedings.

The Tribunal held that the pending criminal appeal against the acquittal, together with the separate criminal case in which the charge sheet had been filed and charges framed, prevented release of gratuity under the applicable pension rules.

The same pendency barred commutation under Rule 4 of the Commutation Rules.

Leave encashment was governed by a different provision: the charges alleged receipt of bribes and criminal conspiracy, but did not specifically allege that the applicant had caused loss to the Government.

Considering that any amount ultimately found recoverable could be adjusted against the other withheld benefits, as well as the applicant’s reported medical circumstances, the Tribunal found it appropriate to direct payment of leave encashment.

It allowed the application in part and directed the respondents to release the applicant’s leave encashment within 60 days of receiving a copy of the order; no costs were awarded.