SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh has directed the Jammu and Kashmir Projects Construction Corporation (JKPCC) to release the withheld retiral benefits and unpaid salary of its former General Manager, Vikar Mustafa Shonthu, holding that the corporation had no legal justification to continue withholding the dues after his discharge in a corruption case.
Justice Sanjay Dhar passed the order while allowing a writ petition filed by Vikar Mustafa Shonthu, who had challenged an enquiry report, recommendations of the corporation’s management and a decision of the Board of Directors that led to withholding of his salary and retirement benefits.
According to the petition, Shonthu was promoted as Deputy General Manager in 2000 and later elevated as General Manager (Civil) in 2015 with the approval of the Board of Directors. In March 2018, he was assigned the additional charge of Managing Director of JKPCC on an in-charge basis, a decision subsequently ratified by the Board.
While serving in that capacity, a government-appointed fact-finding committee examined certain issues relating to the functioning of the corporation and recommended a probe into the circumstances under which Shonthu had been assigned the charge of Managing Director. Acting on the recommendation, the Crime Branch registered FIR No. 10/2019 and later filed a chargesheet before the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Kashmir.
The corporation subsequently placed Shonthu under suspension and initiated a departmental enquiry against him in June 2021. The enquiry officer later held him responsible for allegedly facilitating the preparation and presentation of an incorrect agenda before the Board of Directors, pressuring the then Company Secretary to issue a circular and ensuring issuance of a backdated circular that allegedly benefited him.
Based on the enquiry findings, the Managing Director recommended withholding Shonthu’s retiral benefits until the outcome of the criminal proceedings or framing of charges by the court. The recommendations were approved by the Board of Directors in April 2022.
The petitioner challenged the action, contending that he had neither drawn the salary attached to the post of Managing Director nor received any charge allowance. He further argued that despite retirement, his gratuity of around Rs 20 lakh, leave salary of approximately Rs 10 lakh and salary dues from November 2020 onwards had been withheld.
During the hearing, the High Court noted a significant development that occurred during the pendency of the case. The court observed that the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Srinagar, had discharged the petitioner in FIR No. 10/2019 through an order dated August 29, 2025, resulting in dismissal of the chargesheet.
Justice Dhar held that once the chargesheet had been dismissed and the petitioner discharged, the basis on which the Board of Directors had ordered withholding of retiral benefits no longer survived.
“Once he stands discharged, the respondents cannot withhold his retiral benefits,” the court observed.
The court further declined to examine the legality of the departmental enquiry report and related recommendations, stating that doing so would amount to an academic exercise in view of the subsequent developments.
The corporation had argued that another case, FIR No. 44/2021 registered by the Crime Branch regarding alleged irregularities in Shonthu’s promotion and sanction of leave, remained under investigation.
However, the court held that mere pendency of an investigation, without filing of a chargesheet, could not be treated as a judicial proceeding capable of justifying withholding of pensionary benefits.
Referring to Article 168-A of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service Regulations, Justice Dhar observed that recoveries from pension or retiral benefits can only be made where losses caused to the employer due to negligence or fraud are established in departmental or judicial proceedings.
The court noted that the corporation had neither assessed any financial loss allegedly caused by the petitioner nor demonstrated that he had obtained any monetary benefit from the acts attributed to him.
“In fact, it is admitted case of the respondents that the petitioner has neither drawn the charge allowance nor has he drawn the salary attached to the post of Managing Director. Thus, his alleged actions have not resulted in any monetary benefit to him nor has it resulted in any loss to the respondent Corporation,” the court said.
Holding that the continued withholding of salary and retirement dues was unsustainable, the High Court directed the respondents to release all terminal benefits and unpaid salary to the petitioner within two months.
The court further ordered that if the dues are not released within the stipulated period, the amount shall carry interest at the rate of six per cent per annum from the date of filing of the writ petition until realisation.
