1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 19881 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 7740 OF 2017] DR. NAZRUL ISLAM                              Appellant(s)

                               VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                         Respondent(s)

WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 7741 OF 2017

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J. SLP (C) NO. 7740 OF 2017 1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant is before this Court challenging the  Judgment  dated  08.12.2015  passed  by  the  High Court of Calcutta in WP CT No. 140 of 2015.  The main contention of the appellant is that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him cannot be continued once he has retired from service. 3. The  learned  senior  counsel  appearing  for  the Union  of  India  and  the  State  of  West  Bengal  have invited our attention to Rule 6(1) of the All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958 and submit that the departmental proceedings can be continued for the purpose of withholding the pension or  gratuity,  or  both,  either  in  full  or  in  part,

2

whether  permanently  or  for  a  specified  period  and even  for recovery  from pension  or gratuity  of the whole  or  in  part  if  any  pecuniary  loss  has  been caused to the Central or State Government. 4. No doubt, such recovery is permissible only if the pensioner is found, in a departmental proceeding, to have been guilty of grave misconduct or to have caused  pecuniary  loss  to  the  Central  or  State Government,  by  misconduct  or  negligence  during  his service,  including  the  service  rendered  on reemployment  after  retirement.   Rule  6(1),  to  the extent relevant, reads as follows :-

“The  Central  Government  reserves to itself the right of withholding a  pension  or  gratuity,  or  both, either in full or in part, whether permanently  or  for  a  specified period, and  of ordering  recovery from  pension  or  gratuity  of  the whole  or  part  of  any  pecuniary loss caused to the Central or a State Government, if the pensioner is  found  in  a  departmental  or judicial proceedings to have been guilty of grave misconduct or to have caused pecuniary loss to the Central or a State Government by misconduct  or  negligence,  during his  service,  including  service rendered  on  re-employment  after retirement;

3

Provided  that  no  such  order shall be passed without consulting the  Union  Public  Service Commission.”

5.   Dr. Nazrul Islam, appellant, who is appearing in person, submits that in the Inquiry Report, a copy which  was furnished  to him  during the  pendency of these proceedings, there is no finding of any grave misconduct and, therefore, the proceedings cannot be continued in terms of Rule 6(1) referred to above. We are afraid, this contention cannot be appreciated at this stage. 6.  Now that the Inquiry Report has been submitted, it is for the Central Government to take a decision as  per  the  procedure  prescribed  under  the  Rules. Ultimately  if  the  appellant  is  found  guilty  of  a grave misconduct, then only the question of impact on pension  arises and  that stage  has not  arisen yet. These are all matters for the disciplinary authority to consider while passing final orders.  In the facts of  this case,  we direct  the Central  Government to give  an  opportunity  of  hearing  to  the  appellant before final orders on recovery, if any, are passed. It  is  for  the  appellant  to  raise  all  these contentions  when  the  Central  Government  takes  a decision under Rule 6(1).

4

7. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of. 8. We further direct the Central Government, UPSC and the State Government to conclude the disciplinary proceedings  expeditiously,  taking  note  of  the  fact that the same commenced in the year 2012, and at any rate, within six months from today.  It is made clear that in the unlikely event of such proceedings being not concluded within the said time, the disciplinary proceedings shall be deemed to have been dropped. 9. This period of six months shall stand extended in case the appellant asks for any extension of time, to that extent.   SLP (C) NO. 7741 OF 2017

In view of the Judgment passed in SLP (C) No. 7740 of 2017 above, no separate Judgment is required to be passed in this case.  The same is, accordingly, disposed of in terms of the Judgment passed above.

.......................J.               [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ AMITAVA ROY ]  

New Delhi; November 28, 2017.

5

ITEM NO.22               COURT NO.5               SECTION XVI                S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)  No(s).  7740/2017 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated  08-12-2015 in WPCT No. 140/2015 passed by the High Court At Calcutta) DR. NAZRUL ISLAM                                   Petitioner(s)                                 VERSUS UNION OF INDIA  & ORS.                             Respondent(s) (FOR  PERMISSION  TO  APPEAR  AND  ARGUE  IN  PERSON   ON  IA  3/2016   FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS ON IA 41623/2017)

WITH

SLP(C) No. 7741/2017 (XVI) (FOR  PERMISSION  TO  APPEAR  AND  ARGUE  IN  PERSON  ON  IA  3/2016   FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS ON IA 39524/2017)   Date : 28-11-2017 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY For Petitioner(s) Petitioner-in-person                      For Respondent(s) Mr. Kalyan Bandopadhyay, Sr. Adv.  

Mr. Kunal Chatterjee, Adv.  Mr. Saurav Gupta, Adv.  

                   Mr. Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, AOR Mrs. V. Mohana, Sr. Adv.  Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Adv.  Mr. Sarad Kumar Singhania, Adv.  Mr. V. Balaji, Adv.  Mrs. Manjula Gupta, Adv.  Mr. S. S. Ray, Adv.  Mr. B. V. Balram Das, Adv.  

                   Mr. Parijat Sinha, AOR

6

                        UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following                              O R D E R SLP (C) No. 7740 of 2017   

Leave granted.  The  civil  appeal  is  disposed  of  in  terms  of  the  signed

non-reportable Judgment.   Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

SLP (C) No. 7741 of 2017 In view of the Judgment passed in Civil Appeal No. 19881 of

2017 (@SLP (C) No. 7740 of 2017) above, this Special Leave Petition is disposed of.  

Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA)                              (RENU DIWAN)    COURT MASTER                                ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)