The Rajasthan High Court has upheld an order directing a 10% deduction from the pension of three retired police officers for life, finding that the disciplinary authority had properly established grave negligence in the discharge of their official duties.
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand dismissed the writ petition after examining the disciplinary proceedings, the disagreement with the enquiry report and the circumstances surrounding the incident.
The petitioners were served with a departmental charge-sheet in 2012, while they were still in service. The proceedings related to a law-and-order incident at village Soorwal on March 17, 2011. During the incident, a protest escalated after one protester set himself on fire and jumped from a water tank. A mob later attacked Sub-Inspector Phool Mohammed, set a government vehicle on fire and caused his death.
The Enquiry Officer initially exonerated the petitioners in a report dated July 5, 2019. However, the Disciplinary Authority disagreed with those findings, issued a disagreement notice and considered the petitioners’ responses before imposing the pension penalty.
The High Court noted that the disciplinary proceedings had been initiated before the officers retired. Therefore, the proceedings could continue after retirement under Rule 7 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996. The Court also found that the Disciplinary Authority had recorded reasons while disagreeing with the Enquiry Officer.
The Court observed:
“This Court finds that there was full compliance of the provisions contained under Rules 16(9) to 16(11) of the Rules of 1958. The Disciplinary Authority has not only recorded reasons in its disagreement note, but also made comments on the findings of the Enquiry Officer upon each of the charges levelled against the petitioners. It is not the case of the petitioners that delayed charge-sheet was issued to them after their retirement but the charge-sheet was issued to them before their retirement, but the outcome of the proceedings came after their retirement.”
Holding that the impugned order contained a cogent and reasoned finding and disclosed no legal error warranting interference, the Rajasthan High Court rejected the writ petition. The 10% lifetime deduction from the petitioners’ pension consequently remained undisturbed.
Case Title: Iftkharuddin & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Case Number: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9337/2026
