Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 9105
(RESERVED ON 14.03.2024)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD This the 19th day of March, 2024 ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 646 OF 2021 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH VII, MEMBER (J).
1. Prabhawati W/o Late K.D. Maurya, R/o Matri Chhaya Maurya Niwas, Near City Railway Station, Umarpur, Haribandpur, Jaunpur.
2. Dev Datta Maurya, S/o Late K.D. Maurya, R/o Matri Chhaya Maurya Niwas, Near City Railway Station, Umarpur, Haribandpur, Jaunpur ……… Applicants By Advocate: Sri Deepak Maurya Versus
1. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Communication (Telecom), Department of Tele Communication, Sanchar Bhawan, 20 Ashoka Road, New Delhi.
2. Chairman & Managing Director, BSNL Corporate Office, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Harish Chand Mathura Lane, New Delhi.
3. Divisional Engineer (Headquarter), Office of Principal General Manager, Core Network (Tx North), BSNL, Ground Floor, Telephone Exchange Compound, Kesar Bagh, Lucknow.
4. General Manager, Core Network (Tx North), BSNL Microwave Station, Compound1-A Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur.
5. Divisional Engineer (OFC) Core Network (Tx North), BSNL, Varanasi Office of General Manager, Microwave Station, Compound1-A Sarvodaya Nagar, Kanpur.
6. Assistant General Manager (Establishment)-1 Corporate Office, Pension Section, 5th floor, Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, Mathur Lane, New Delhi.
7. Assistant General Manager (HRD), Office of CGM, CN (Tx-North), BSNL-2nd floor, Qidwai Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi.
………… Respondents By Advocate : Sri D.S. Shukla
O R D E R
The applicants have filed the instant Original Application seeking the following relief(s):-
“(a) to quash the impugned orders dated 5.2.2018 passed by respondent no.6 as well as the order dated 29.4.2021 passed by the respondent no.7 by means of which the claim of the applicants relating to payment of interest of Ex-gratia amount as well as the interest on pension/family pension has been rejected in an arbitrary and illegal manner against the provisions contained under the Central Government Pension Rules.
(b) to direct the respondent authorities to sanction the payment of penal interest @ 18% per annum on delayed payment of ex-gratia amount lump sum compensation and difference of amount of ordinary family pension, Extra Ordinary family pension to the applicants which were paid in the year 2017 instead of in the year
2009 by the respondent authorities.
(c) to issue an order or direction may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
(d) to award the costs to the applicants.”
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the husband of applicant no.1 and father of applicant no.2 namely Late K.D. Maurya, who was working with the respondents as Sub Divisional Engineer (OFC), Jaunpur under respondent no.6 died on 9.5.2009 in a road accident. On the sad demise of husband of applicant no.1, she was sanctioned family pension under Rule 54 of CCS (Pension) Rules. According to the applicant, certain guidelines have been provided in EOP Rules of 1939 for providing extra-ordinary pension and the same was considered by the DoPT while issuing the O.M. dated 3.2.2000. Pursuant to the aforementioned O.M., the applicant preferred an application on 23.3.2010 with a prayer for ex-gratia payment. On this, the matter was remitted back to the authority concerned vide letter dated 9.2.2011 with a direction to examine the issue.
2.1 Ultimately, after the long battle, the ex-gratia payment was made to the applicant vide order dated 29.3.2017 and the arrears thereof were credited in the account of applicant no.1 on 3.7.2017. The applicants claim that since they have been paid family pension after a period of one year and that the amount relating to ex-gratia has been made to them after a period of more than nine years and as such they are entitled to get the amount of interest on the delayed payment of family pension for one year and on ex-gratia amount, which has been paid to them after a period of nine years. Being aggrieved, the applicants preferred series of representations and ultimately the claim of the applicants has been rejected by the respondents vide order dated 5.2.2018, which has been reiterated in the order dated 29.4.2021 in reference to letter dated 22.2.2021 as submitted by the applicant no.1. Hence, this O.A.
3. On notice, the respondents have contested the claim of the applicants by filing a detailed Counter Affidavit wherein they have stated that K.D. Maurya, the then SDE (OFC), Jaunpur died in a road accident on 9.5.2009 and consequently the family pension under Rule 54 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 was paid to the applicant no.1 w.e.f. 10.5.2009 by issuing PPO in her favour on 11.1.2010.
3.1 The respondents have also considered the claim of the applicants for grant of extra ordinary pension and the same was granted to applicant no.1 vide PPO issued by the office of CCA, Delhi on 16.5.2017 and thereafter the arrears of family pension w.e.f. 10.5.2009 based on the revised family pension under CCS (Extra Ordinary Pension) Rules, 1972 after deducting the payment already made under Family pension under Rule 54 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 has been made. The applicant was in receipt of family pension w.e.f. 10.5.2009 onwards. The applicant no.1 was also allowed family pension under CCS (Extra Ordinary Pension) Rules, 1939 after following the due process. The respondents have also averred that the request of the applicant no.1 for grant of ex-gratia lump sum compensation was also considered by the competent aut
