ORDER

The applicant is a Railway pensioner. He retired from service on 31.03.2020. According to him, he started his service as casual labourer in 1980 and was regularised on 15.05.1989 as Track Maintainer. After putting in 40 years of service, he retired on superannuation on 31.03.2020. The grievance of the applicant is that despite the fact that he had retired from service on 31.03.2020, even after lapse of more than 6 months he has not been granted any amount towards pensionary benefits. As per the statute, such pensionary benefits should be granted immediately after retirement. But there is negligence on the part of the respondents in granting him retiral benefits. Such a conduct is illegal, unjust, unreasonable and against all norms and statutory mandates.

Therefore, he has sought for a declaration that he should be granted all the pensionary benefits including full pension immediately, that he is entitled for full pensionary benefits with effect from the date of his retirement and to grant him interest on the delayed payment.

2. According to the applicant, in 2011 a false case was registered against him as Crime 885/2011 of Mannuthy Police Station. He alleges that his name was included among the names of the accused on a trade union rivalry in which trade union he was a part earlier. Thus the respondents, on the influence of the trade union leaders, placed him under suspension for 310 days, later he was reinstated in service, so far no disciplinary action has been taken against him and thus for the mere reason that his name happened to be arrayed in the final report, his pension has been illegally withheld, which is sought to be undone by the intervention of this Tribunal.

3. The respondents have filed reply statement denying the contentions in the application. According to them, a final report has been laid in Crime 885/2011 of Mannuthy Police Station by the Crime Branch before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur as CC No.14/2018 alleging offence under Sections 120B, 406, 420, 418 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 4,5 and 6 of the Price Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978. The alleged offences were committed while the applicant was in service and therefore the applicant is clearly guilty under Rule 16 of the Railway Service (Conduct) Rules and thus he was placed under suspension on 17.07.2011 invoking Rule 5(1) of the Railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1968. Later, the suspension was recalled and he was reinstated in service on 17.05.2012. In the light of the pendency of CC 14/2018, as provided under Rules 9(3) and 10(1)(a) and Rule 10(1)(c) of the Railway Service (Pension) Rules, he is not entitled to get full pension and gratuity. During the pendency of the petition, by order dated 15.06.2020, he has been granted provisional pension. The basic pay of the applicant at the time of retirement was Rs.41,000/- and his provisional pension is Rs.20,500/- with dearness relief. Similarly, he has been granted an amount of Rs.21,777/- on 31.03.2020 under the Group Insurance Scheme, Rs.70,709/- on 31.03.2020 under the Provident Fund, leave salary of Rs.4,59,713/- on 01.07.2020 and Rs.10,000/- as Social Security Scheme, on 13.04.2020. So, according to the respondents, except gratuity, entire pensionary benefits have been released to him from the month of April 2020. As provided under Rules 8(1)(a) and(b) of Pension Rules, he is not entitled to get full pension. Similarly, under Rule 8(1)(c) he is not entitled to get gratuity also, during the pendency of the judicial proceedings. Thus the O.A. is sought to be dismissed.

4. I heard Smt. Shameena Salahudeen for the applicant and Smt. O.M.Shalina, SCGSC, for the respondents.

5. According to Smt. Shameena, even though the applicant is accused No.18 in Annexure-A1 charge sheet, his name was not in the FIR. When his name was incorporated he was placed under suspension on 12.