TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 540
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he learned Single Judge in Civil Writ Petition Original Application No. 5144/2019 came to be disposed of. 2. The appellant was working in the respondent-Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation [For short, "Corporation"] as a Clerk from 1979 onwards. In 2000, he was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant. He continued in service until he retired upon attaining the age of superannuation on 28.02.2009. 3. The allegation against the appellant is that between May and July 2006, he was involved in the leak of the question paper of the Combined Pre-Medical Test, 2006 [For short, "CPMT"]. We note that the respondent-Corporation contends that prior to the same, in the course of his employment, the appellant had already been suspended twi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e custody and subsequently released on bail; and that his name appeared at Serial No. 20 in a list of accused persons forwarded by the Home Department to various departments. Two departmental witnesses were examined, both of whom merely proved receipt of official correspondence directing the initiation of departmental action. In his defence, the appellant admitted being taken into police custody for 22 hours but denied any involvement in the paper leak. He further provided an explanation of the alleged financial transactions and mobile phone usage relied upon by the Police, and asserted that no misconduct had been established against him. Upon analysis of the oral and documentary evidence, the Inquiry Officer concluded that there was no mat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 9. On 18.12.2013, the appellant sought a copy of the departmental inquiry report from the Divisional Manager of the respondent-Corporation, Hamirpur, stating that the same was required for defending proceedings before the Court. As no copy was furnished to him, the Divisional Manager, Hamirpur, by communication dated 23.12.2013, requested the Managing Director of the respondent-Corporation to supply a copy of the inquiry report so that it could be provided to the appellant. The appellant again approached the respondent- Corporation by way of a representation dated 09.02.2015, reiterating his grievance regarding the withholding of his gratuity and pensionary benefits. 10. Ultimately, on 28.05.2015, the charges against the appellant w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cial proceedings and issue of final orders thereon: Provided that where departmental proceedings have been instituted under Rule 16 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, for imposing any of the penalties specified in Clauses (i), (ii) and (iv) of Rule 11 of the said rules, the payment of gratuity shall be authorized to be paid to the Government servant." The appellant contends that the expression "departmental or judicial proceedings" in Rule 69(1)(c) must be construed to mean that gratuity becomes payable upon the conclusion of either set of proceedings. 12. Such a submission totally misapprehends the nature of the Rule. As the learned Single Judge had rightly noted at the first inst....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....afeguard the financial interests of the State. 14. Even in the instant case, where both the proceedings stem from identical allegations, their nature, scope, and standard of proof remain fundamentally different. By way of illustration, let us consider if the converse were true i.e., the criminal case against the appellant had concluded in an acquittal due to failure to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It would nevertheless be possible that the appellant was eventually found liable in the pending departmental proceedings on a preponderance of probabilities. An acquittal in that case could not be determinative. If such an approach is impermissible in one direction, it cannot be countenanced in the other either. Moreover, this disti....