<div>Just because an employee has retired or attained the age of superannuation, it is no ground to abate the disciplinary proceedings for any misconduct, the Supreme Court has held. <br /><br />If the inquiry proceedings were initiated during the continuance of service and the employee is found to have caused pecuniary losses to the department, an order to cut pension can be passed, the court further held.<br /><br />A vacation bench of Justices A K Goel and A M Khanwilkar said that it was permissible to order withholding of pension even after the employee has superannuated.<br /><br />The court explained the legal position, while allowing an appeal filed by West Bengal against a Calcutta High Court order.<br /><br />The HC had held that once an employee was allowed to retire on attaining the age of superannuation, the authority concerned had no jurisdiction to pass an order in a disciplinary proceeding since the master-servant relationship cannot exist after retirement.<br /><br />The state government challenged the HC's ruling. It maintained that under Rule 10(1) of the West Bengal Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971, pension can be withheld if either any pecuniary loss was caused by the employee or he or she was found to be guilty of misconduct or negligence while in service. <br /><br />In its decision, the apex court held that the view taken by the HC cannot be sustained. There was no bar to issue such order after superannuation as the inquiry had already been initiated before retirement which could have been continued even after the retirement. <br /><br /></div>
<div>Just because an employee has retired or attained the age of superannuation, it is no ground to abate the disciplinary proceedings for any misconduct, the Supreme Court has held. <br /><br />If the inquiry proceedings were initiated during the continuance of service and the employee is found to have caused pecuniary losses to the department, an order to cut pension can be passed, the court further held.<br /><br />A vacation bench of Justices A K Goel and A M Khanwilkar said that it was permissible to order withholding of pension even after the employee has superannuated.<br /><br />The court explained the legal position, while allowing an appeal filed by West Bengal against a Calcutta High Court order.<br /><br />The HC had held that once an employee was allowed to retire on attaining the age of superannuation, the authority concerned had no jurisdiction to pass an order in a disciplinary proceeding since the master-servant relationship cannot exist after retirement.<br /><br />The state government challenged the HC's ruling. It maintained that under Rule 10(1) of the West Bengal Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefit) Rules, 1971, pension can be withheld if either any pecuniary loss was caused by the employee or he or she was found to be guilty of misconduct or negligence while in service. <br /><br />In its decision, the apex court held that the view taken by the HC cannot be sustained. There was no bar to issue such order after superannuation as the inquiry had already been initiated before retirement which could have been continued even after the retirement. <br /><br /></div>
