In a notable legal decision, Justice Neeraj Tiwari of the Allahabad High Court has issued a ruling that establishes a precedent concerning the termination of an employee due to a criminal conviction and their eligibility for post-retirement benefits.

The case centered around Vishwanath Vishwakarma as the petitioner and the State of Uttar Pradesh as the respondent. The verdict, which was kept pending on April 25, 2023, and subsequently announced on September 18, 2023, dealt with various significant matters concerning the petitioner's employment, termination, and entitlement to retirement benefits.

The petitioner had received a life imprisonment conviction in a criminal case in 2009. Later, on August 30, 2014, an order for his dismissal from employment was issued, with the sole justification being his conviction. However, it was observed that this dismissal order did not take into account the petitioner's conduct in accordance with Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution of India.

In his appeal, the petitioner contested the dismissal order, asserting that the employee's behavior should have been considered along with the conviction before issuing the order. This argument was backed by Article 311(2)(a) of the Constitution. 

The appellate order, which was issued on May 13, 2015, provided partial relief to the petitioner. It instructed the payment of his provident fund (GPF) amount but withheld other post-retirement benefits until the final disposition of the petitioner's criminal appeal.

In its judgment, the Court strongly supported the petitioner's arguments. It referenced several legal precedents, including decisions from the Supreme Court, to emphasize that even after an employee's conviction, the behavior that led to that conviction must be taken into account before any dismissal or removal from service can be justified.

The court observed, “on conviction of an employee of a criminal charge, the order of punishment cannot be passed unless the conduct which has led to his conviction is also considered. It was further held that the scrutiny or exercise of conduct of an employee leading to his conviction is to be done ex parte and an opportunity of hearing is not to be provided for this purpose to the employee concerned.”

In relation to post-retirement benefits, the Court emphasized that pensions and similar entitlements are not simply acts of generosity but are regarded as property rights under Article 300(A) of the Constitution of India. Consequently, they cannot be withheld unless there exists a legal provision permitting such denial.

In light of these principles, the Court invalidated both the dismissal order dated August 30, 2014, and the appellate order dated May 13, 2015. Furthermore, the Court ruled that considering the petitioner's age, who had already reached the age of superannuation, and the fact that his employment contract had naturally concluded, he should be entitled to receive all post-retirement benefits, including pension and other dues as permitted by the law.

Case: Vishwanath Vishwakarma Vs State Of U.P., WRIT – A No. – 4422 of 2015.