Regarding departmental proceeding instituted
P k ag
(Querist) 21 June 2015
This query is : Resolved
I have been retired from government department on dated 31-03-2015. The department headquarter have been issued a charge sheet to me on dated 27-03-2015 (Charge sheet period covered before 31-12-2009), but the same given me on dated 05-04-2015, after my retirement.
Please let me know what would be the effect on my pension? Under section 351-A of CSR.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 22 June 2015
You have not stated whether it is central or state govt.
You have not intimated whether it is major penalty chargesheet.
post retirement chargesheet is generally for major penalty (correct me if I am wrong)
such chargesheet, if proved can result in full/partial cut in pension.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 22 June 2015
please eleborate whet do you mean by
"(Charge sheet period covered before 31-12-2009)"
Guest
(Expert) 22 June 2015
Your information is quite incomplete. Please clarify:
1) Charge Sheet served under which rule?
2) CSR of which state?
3) Whether Rule 351-A of CSR relates to admissibility of pension or disciplinary action after retirement?
Better reproduce the whole text of Rule 351-A of CSR for better appreciation and analysis of the case.
P. Venu
(Expert) 22 June 2015
Please provide the clarifications sought.
If a Central Government servant you are entitled to receive provisional pension, which would be 50% of the present basic pay plus DA and the medical allowance of Rs.500/-
You are entitled for leave encashment subject to the provisions of Rule 39(c) of the Leave Rules. Your GPF savings, Savings fund of the Group Insurance would be released in the normal course.
Sanction of Gratuity, Commutation of Pension and grant of Regular Pension would be only after completion of the Inquiry.
P k ag
(Querist) 22 June 2015
I was retired from U.P government service as on 31/jan/15 with due regards. After my retirement a charge sheets served to me on 6/Feb/2015. which was received in my office by post on 2/ february/2015 from lucknow headquarter. The period covered in charge sheet is august 2007 to my 2009 from negligence.
1. whether I should reply the charge sheet or not.
2. I took the benefit of CSR 351A, because the charge is an event which took place more than 4 years before institution of such proceedings.
3. "As per CSR 351 A, the departmental proceedings shall be deemed to have been instituted when the charged framed against the pensioner are issued to him." In this condition when I was retired and upto 3/january/2015 the charge sheet neither has been received in my office from lucknow headquarter and nor give into me after my retirement date as on 31st january 2015.
please suggest what will be effect on my pensionary claims and what I will do?
Thank You
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 22 June 2015
Author please reply the questions from expert for advise.
Guest
(Expert) 22 June 2015
The rule under which charge sheet served after retirement is still relevant, whether that was issued under the relevant CDA rules or under the relevant rule of the CSR for the retirees. That you have omitted to explain.
Further, you have also not reproduced the provisions of Rule 351A for interpretation of the experts.
Your interpretation of the condition of 4 years seems to be wrong, as it can be for the events noticed after elapse of 4 years of your retirement, not for the period of 4 years prior to your retirement. That is why I asked you to reproduce the provision of rule 351A.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 22 June 2015
in Central Govt no post retirement proceeding can be initiated for an event which is more than 4 years old.
please reproduce CSR 351A
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 23 June 2015
Dear P K Ag,
Are you sure with respect to the dates, i.e.,
a) date of retirement as you have stated 31/3/2015 or 31/jan/15;
b) charge-sheet served on 27/3/2015, 5/4/2015, 6 February 15 by post or 2 February 15 in office;
c) period of charge is covered before 31-12-2009 or August 2007-2009?
Clarifications sought by the experts is still awaited for proper analyzing and opinion, it would be better to consult a local lawyer.
