Disciplinary proceedings against a retired government employee initiated beyond four years are arbitrary and violate CCS Pension Rules, affirming the principle of fairness and legitimate expectation.

JUDGMENT :

(PER N.R. BORKAR, J.)

1. The Petitioner takes exception to Order dated 31.07.2024 passed by the Ld. Central Administrative Tribunal (for short ‘Tribunal’) in Original Application No. 145 of 2014. The Tribunal dismissed OA filed by the Petitioner challenging the Order dated 06.08.2013 issued by the Respondent no.1. By the impugned order, the petitioner was subjected to a permanent penalty entailing the forfeiture of his entire monthly pension along with his entire gratuity.

2. The Petitioner is a retired Superintendent of Central Excise, Thane II Commissionerate. Respondent no.1 is the Secretary of the Minister of Finance, Department of Revenue. The Respondent no.2 is the Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane II.

3. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the Petitioner belongs to the caste ‘Hindu Golla’ and according to the Petitioner the same is recognized as a Nomadic Tribe in the State of Karnataka. In 1973-74, the Petitioner enrolled his name in the Regional Employment Exchange at Dharwad. Thereafter, vide Order dated 10.06.1976, the Petitioner was selected and appointed on the post of Inspector of Central Excise. Upon joining the said post, the Petitioner was asked to submit an Attestation Form, wherein he has stated that he does not belong to a Scheduled Tribe (ST), instead he belongs to a Nomadic Tribe. In 1979, a list of seniority of Inspectors was published, wherein the caste of the Petitioner was indicated as ‘ST’ and subsequently, on 26.06.1991, the Petitioner was promoted to the post of Superintendent of Central Excise Department, on the basis of considering his caste as ST.

4. In June, 2004, the Petitioner opted for voluntary retirement on the ground of his wife’s ill health. Thereafter, on 23.06.2004 and 13.09.2004, the Respondents informed the Petitioner that the Joint Commissioner (P&V), Central Excise, Mumbai-I had observed that the caste of the Petitioner is shown as ‘Hindu Golla’ in his service book, whereas, there is no mention of his caste status as ST. Accordingly, clarification was sought from the Petitioner along with his caste certificate. Soon thereafter, the voluntary retirement application of the Petitioner was accepted and he was released vide Order dated 30.09.2004. However, it was mentioned in the said release order that the Petitioner ‘may’ produce his caste certificate for taking necessary actions for his pensionary benefits and other emoluments due after voluntary retirement. Consequently, the pension, gratuity and leave encashment of the Petitioner was withheld, despite the absence of any criminal or disciplinary proceedings pending against him. Subsequently, provisional pension was sanctioned and arrears were paid on 01.10.2006.

5. Thereafter, on 02.09.2008, Respondent no.1 issued a Memorandum of Charge-sheet to the Petitioner, thereby alleging that the Petitioner fraudulently claimed and availed the benefits of Reservation available to candidates belonging to the Scheduled Tribe, in the year 1976 for his appointment and in 1991 for his promotion. Accordingly, an Inquiry was conducted and vide Inquiry Report dated 12.04.2012, it was observed that the inquiry proceedings against the Petitioner were initiated more than four years after the event that led to the inquiry, therefore, it is in contravention to the period specified in Rule 9 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. However, considering the merits of the case, the Inquiry Officer by the Report held that the charge against the Petitioner was proved.

6. Subsequently, as regards contrave