Prem Singh and Another vs State of Punjab and Others

Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.

CM No. 12971 of 2013:

Application is allowed as prayed for.

CM disposed of.

CM No. 12972 of 2013:

Application is allowed. Annexure P-9 is taken on record.

CM disposed of.

Main case:

The challenge in the instant writ petition is to the orders both carrying even date i.e. 30.11.2012 at Annexures P-1 & P-2 respectively, whereby the claim of the petitioners, who are Ex-Conductors under Punjab Roadways for grant of pensionary benefits has been rejected. Brief facts would require notice. Petitioner No. 1 joined the Department of Transport, State of Punjab on the post of Conductor in the month of February, 1976. In pursuance to regular departmental proceedings having been initiated against him on the charge of embezzlement of funds, a major penalty of removal from service was imposed vide order dated 18.06.1986. Petitioner No. 1 preferred a civil suit impugning such order. The suit was decreed in his favour by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 07.12.1988 (Annexure P-5). However, in the first appeal preferred by the Department, the judgment of the Trial Court was reversed and the order of removal dated 18.06.1986 was upheld.

Insofar as petitioner No. 2 is concerned, he joined service with the Transport Department on the post of Conductor on 26.02.1968. In his case also a regular departmental inquiry was held on the charge of embezzlement and he was removed from service vide order dated 09.06.1982. Counsel for the petitioner concedes that even the appeal preferred by petitioner No. 2 against the order of removal was rejected by the State Government.

Counsel for the petitioners would strenuously argue that even though the issue as regards removal from service of both the petitioners has since attained finality but still the petitioners would be vested with a right for grant of pensionary benefits in the light of the fact that they had more than 10 years service to their credit. That apart, heavy reliance has been placed upon order dated 18.02.2008 at Annexure P-6 passed by the State Government whereby the appeal preferred by one Sh. Gurdial Singh whose service had also been removed on the similar charge had been accepted and the order of penalty was modified to that of retirement. Counsel would argue that the respondent-authorities are proceeding in an arbitrary fashion and adopting a policy of pick and choose.

Having heard counsel for the petitioner at length, I am of the considered view that the present writ petition is wholly misconceived.

Under Rule 2.5 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules Volume II, no pension is admissible to a government employee dismissed or removed from service for misconduct, insolvency or inefficiency. Admittedly, the services of both the petitioners have been removed on the charges of embezzlement having been duly proved. Counsel has not been able to advert to any statutory provision on the strength of which the claim for pensionary benefits can be accepted in relation to an employee removed from service on account of having committed fraud and embezzlement.

As such, there would be no basis that would justify interference in the impugned orders at Annexures P-1 & P-2.

Even the reliance placed by the counsel upon order at Annexure P-6 whereby in the case of another employee i.e. Sh. Gurdial Singh, a lenient view may have been taken is wholly misplaced. The concept of equality as enshrined under Article 14 of the Constitution of India is not a negative concept. The same cannot be invoked to perpetuate any illegality and irregularity. Under the admitted position of fact that orders of removal from service of the petitioners having already attained finality, the claim as regards pensionary benefits cannot be entertained. For the reasons recorded above, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed.