Hrishikesh Roy, J.

Heard Mr. Y. Doloi, learned Central Government Counsel, appearing for the petitioners. The respondent/applicant is represented by Mr. S. Dutta, Advocate.

2. The challenge here is to the order dated 23.4.2012 (Annexure-III to the O.A. No. 44/2011) whereby the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'CAT') granted relief to the retired applicant and quashed the penalty order dated 20.12.2010 whereby the punishment of withholding of 20% of the monthly pension for a period of 5 years, was inflicted on the delinquent by invocation of the powers conferred under Rule 9(1) of the Central Civil Services Pension Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Pension Rules'). At the relevant time, the applicant was functioning as the Joint Area Organiser in the SSB at Palia (UP) and the disciplinary proceeding was drawn up against him on the following three charges :

"Article-I.

That the said Shri P.K. Choudhury, while functioning in the Area Office, Palia in the capacity of Head of Office and Drawing and Disbursing Officer with effect from 28.02.2002 preferred the claim on account of arrears of ration money allowance for Rs. 8,32,375/- (Rupees eight lac, thirty two thousand, three hundred seventy six only) on 05.02.2003 without any authorisation and specific order of the competent authority. Thus the said Shri P.K. Choudhury has thereby committed a misconduct and an act most unbecoming of a Government servant of his rank and status thereby violating clause II and III of Sub-Rule 1 of Rule 3 of the CCS(Conduct) Rules, 1964.

Article-II.

That during the aforesaid period and while functioning in the aforesaid office, the said Shri P.K. Choudhury, was directed to prefer the claims of Ration Money Allowance of only those non-executive staff who are applicants in the court case filed in the Jammu High Court and Guwahati High Court, but the said Shri P.K. Choudhury ignored the direction of the higher authority and preferred the claim of arrears of ration money allowance to the other personnel also thus disobeying the orders of the Competent Authority thereby committing an act unbecoming of a Government servant of his rank and status violating clause III of Sub Rule 1 of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964.

Article-III.

That during the aforesaid period 24 Non Executive Staff of Palia Area filed an OA No. 414 of 2004 in the Hon'ble CAT Lukhnow Bench for allowing them arrear of Ration Allowance for the period they remained posted in B&C Stations of erstwhile HP Division. The said Shri Choudhury failed to inform the Hqrs. the fact that the applicants had already claimed and received the Ration Allowance arrear in the year 2003 and also failed to project the fact regarding furnishing the false affidavits by the applicants. Thereby the said Shri Choudhury has failed in his capacity as a Supervisory Officer and has negligently and casually dealt the whole issue committing a misconduct most unbecoming of a Government servant of his rank and status violating clause II & III of Sub Rule (1) of Rule 3 of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964."

3. The charges were enquired and in the inquiry report it was declared that charge-1 is fully proved, charge-2 is partially proved and charge 3 is not proved. Since the charged officer was holding a senior position, it was held that he was expected to exercise financial propriety of a very high degree. Thus it was proposed to deduct from the payable pension of the retired employee. Consequently, the impugned penalty order was passed in the name of the President, for withholding of 20% of the monthly pension for a period of 5 years, for the charged officer.

4. Aggrieved by the deduction of pension by the order of the President, the retired officer filed the O.A. No. 44/2011 before the CAT where it was argued that curtailment of pension under Rule 9 (1) of the CCS Rules was unjustified inasmuch as, the penalty order was passed mechanically without recording any finding that this was a case of