Court Rules Disciplinary Proceedings Cannot Continue Automatically Post-Retirement Without Governor’s Approval Under Civil Services Regulation 351-A
In a significant judgment delivered on September 3, 2026, the Allahabad High Court has set aside an order passed by the Director of Social Welfare Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, which had directed a reduction of two-thirds of the pension and recovery of Rs. 36,98,603/- from Ganesh Prasad, a retired government servant. The Court held that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner prior to his retirement could not be continued after he had superannuated on March 31, 2008, without the mandatory prior sanction of the Governor, as prescribed under Regulation 351-A of the Civil Services Regulations.
Ganesh Prasad, who served initially as Junior Clerk and later as Senior Clerk in the District Welfare Office, Ballia, faced disciplinary proceedings starting August 11, 2005. The enquiry concluded ex-parte without providing him the documents he requested for his defense. Before any final decision was made, Prasad retired. Post-retirement, he was denied his retiral dues and pensionary benefits, prompting him to seek judicial intervention.
The Court extensively examined Regulation 351-A, which states that disciplinary proceedings initiated before retirement do not automatically continue after retirement. Furthermore, any continuation or initiation of such proceedings after retirement requires the prior sanction of the Governor. This regulation aims to safeguard retired officers from harassment and ensure that pension and retiral benefits are not withheld arbitrarily.
The Court observed that despite earlier rulings, including a Division Bench decision of this Court and orders from the State Public Services Tribunal, quashing prior punitive orders due to lack of Governor’s sanction, the Social Welfare Department again passed an order on January 15, 2015, reducing the pension without any such sanction. This was held to be illegal and a clear violation of the Regulation. The Court noted the biased and deliberate approach of the departmental authorities in continuing punitive actions against the petitioner, thereby unjustly depriving him of his lawful dues.
Citing precedents including the Supreme Court judgment in State of U.P. vs. Shri Krishna Pandey (1996) and the Allahabad High Court’s own earlier judgment in Harihar Bhole Nath Misra vs. State Public Services Tribunal (2005), the Court reiterated that no disciplinary proceedings can continue after retirement without Governor’s sanction, and initiation of fresh proceedings must be within four years from the date of the event or institution of proceedings.
In light of these principles, the Court quashed the impugned order and directed the State to pay all retiral dues and pensionary benefits due to Ganesh Prasad within eight weeks, with interest at 8% per annum. Failure to comply would attract interest at 12% per annum. This judgment reinforces the protective framework around pension rights of government servants and limits arbitrary departmental harassment post-retirement.
Bottom Line:
Regulation 351-A of Civil Services Regulations mandates that after the retirement of a government servant, disciplinary proceedings initiated prior to his retirement cannot continue automatically, and no punishment can be imposed without the prior sanction of the Governor.
Statutory provision(s):
Civil Services Regulations 351-A
Ganesh Prasad v. State Of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2972551
