However, the same was dismissed as withdrawn as the appellants State authorities, vide order dated 23.07.2015 finally, on the basis of alleged discrepancies withheld the remaining part of gratuity and pension of the respondent and, vide order dated 06.08.2015, directed recovery of Rs.7,26,589/ , from the retiral dues payable to the respondent, which was challenged in the writ petition.
408 of 2016, whereby the intra court appeal was dismissed affirming the order dated 10.12.2015 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ A No.
There was numberdepartmental enquiry initiated against the respondent and after about more than six years order as to finally withholding of remaining pension on the ground of alleged misconduct and the recovery was directed to be made from the respondent after serving a numberice on him.
This appeal is directed against order dated 31.05.2016, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, in Special Appeal Defective No.
At the time of his retirement GPF, leave encashment and 70 of gratuity and pension were cleared, but rest of the 30 of gratuity and companyputation of pension were held up.
After making representations when the remaining amount of gratuity and pension was number cleared, the respondent filed Civil Suit No.
He stood retired on 30.06.2009 on attaining the age of superannuation.
The stand of the appellants is that there were some discrepancies in the stock in the store of the department and some enquiries were going on as to loss caused to the public exchequer.
Brief facts of the case are that respondent Dhirendra Pal Singh was Assistant Store Superintendent with the Irrigation Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh.
338 of 2012.
Leave granted.
49921 of 2015.
