Back
2023 Supreme(Cal) 1644
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR
I.P.Mukerji, Shampa Dutt (Paul), JJ.
S. Jaladharan –Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India and others – Respondents
WP.CT/69/2023
Decided On : 18-12-2023
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Arul Prasanth
For the Respondent: Mr. Rakesh Kumar
The court mandated the immediate release of pensionary benefits, emphasizing compliance with tribunal orders and the invalidity of withholding benefits post-exoneration.
Headnote:(A) Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021 - Rule 62 - Non-payment of pensionary benefits - The Central Administrative Tribunal ordered the administration to settle the grievance regarding pensionary benefits within 30 days, which was not complied with - The petitioner was exonerated from all charges prior to retirement, yet his pension was withheld due to unavailability of a vigilance clearance report - The court directed immediate release of pension within two months irrespective of the vigilance report. (Paras 2, 4, 8, 11)
(B) Compliance with Tribunal Orders - The administration's failure to comply with the tribunal's order was highlighted, indicating a lack of adherence to legal directives. (Paras 3, 4, 6)
Facts of the case:
The writ application arose from the non-payment of pensionary benefits to the petitioner, who was exonerated from allegations prior to retirement but faced delays in pension disbursement due to administrative procedures.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the administration's actions were inconsistent with the tribunal's order and mandated the release of pension within a specified timeframe.
Issues: The main issues addressed included the legality of withholding pension despite exoneration and the administration's compliance with tribunal orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the administration must comply with tribunal orders and cannot withhold pension on the grounds of unavailability of a vigilance report when the petitioner was exonerated.
Result: Writ application disposed of with directions for pension release.
JUDGMENT :
1. This writ application is arising out of non-payment of pensionary benefits to the writ petitioner.
2. By the order dated 24th November, 2023, the Central Administrative Tirbunal, Kolkata Bench, Circuit at Port Blair ordered as follows:
“6. We have perused the material on record and, considering the submission of Learned Counsel for the applicant, we deem it fit to dispose of this OA, at admission stage, with a direction upon respondent no.4, i.e. Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman District, to settle the grievance of the applicant with respect to grant of pensionary benefits to him, in not later than 30 days from today.”
3. The Administration did not carry out the order. Instead it issued an office order being Order No.623 dated 30th November, 2023 to the following effect.
“Whereas Shri S. Jaladharan, Tehsildar (Retired) is placed on superannuation pension list w.e.f 3.05.2023 (AN) vide this office Order No.628 dated 29/1/2022 on attending the age of superannuation pension being his date of birth is 25.05.1963 as recorded in Service Book.
AND THEREFORE, in terms of the provision contained under Rule 62 of CCS Pension Rules, 2021, the Provision Pension is hereby sanctioned for a period of six months w.e.f 01.06.2023 to Shri S Jaladharan, Tehsildar (Retired) for Rs.33000/-per month plus dearness allowances and fixed medical allowance.”
4. The Administration did not challenge the order of the tribunal. The office order dated 30th November, 2023 is most inconsistent with the order of the tribunal.
5. The justification sought to be made by the Administration is this:
6. A complaint had been lodged against the petitioner on 8th February, 2021. This complaint was enquired into. The petitioner retired from service after 31st May, 2023. On 31st May, 2023 itself the enquiry report was furnished exonerating him.
7. Thus, at the time of retirement of the petitioner, no proceedings were pending against him. In spite of exoneration, on the pretext that the vigilance clearance report was not available, his pension was held up.
8. At the time of retirement and thereafter there was no allegation of misappropriation or defalcation of fund against the writ petitioner. On the contrary, the enquiry which the Administration initiated against him resulted in an enquiry report dated 31st May, 2023 absolving him of the charge or allegation made against him. On the existing facts the vigilance department of the Administration shall file a report stating that there is no case against the petitioner, within four weeks from date. Pension, in terms of the said order of the tribunal has to be released to the writ petitioner within two months from date irrespective of furnishing of the vigilance report.
9. Leave is granted to the petitioner to take out a separate proceeding for interest on pension and other retiral benefits if the said right is vested in him.
10. The original records be returned to learned counsel for the respondent.
11. The writ application is accordingly disposed of.
