SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 11732

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Suresh Kumar Batra, Member (J)
Sewa Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Original Application No.060/00826/2019



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Harpal Singh Saini
For the Respondents: Sanjay Goyal, Sr. CGSC, Pankaj Khurana

Corruption conviction for personal gain disentitles dismissed employee from compassionate allowance under Rule 41 CCS (Pension) Rules.

Headnote:Under Rule 41 of CCS (Pension) Rules 1972, compassionate allowance may be granted to dismissed employees deserving special consideration. Applicant, convicted under S.7 and S.13(1)(d) r/w S.13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 for taking illegal gratification, dismissed from service after 29 years. Tribunal previously directed reconsideration; respondents rejected citing poverty insufficient and dishonest conduct. Court applied Mahinder Dutt Sharma parameters, classifying corruption as act for personal gain from employer, disentitling allowance. Main issue: Whether applicant's corruption conviction warrants compassionate allowance under Rule 41 despite financial hardship. Ratio from Supreme Court holds claims must be evaluated on moral turpitude, dishonesty, personal gain, harm to third parties, or other unacceptable acts; corruption falls under personal gain via misuse of position, ordinarily barring allowance absent momentous special considerations. Original Application dismissed; rejection of compassionate allowance upheld.

Table of Content
1. background of corruption conviction, dismissal, prior proceedings. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. parties' contentions on compassionate allowance eligibility. (Para 6 , 7)
3. review of facts, conviction details, rule 41 provisions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. application of supreme court parameters denying allowance for corruption. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. application dismissed, rejection upheld. (Para 17)

ORDER

Per: SURESH KUMAR BATRA MEMBER (J):-

1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 seeking the following relief:-

(i) To quash the order dated 18.04.2019 passed in pursuance to order dated 11.03.2019 (Annexure A-15) passed by this Tribunal.

(ii) The applicant be held entitled for grant of compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972.

(iii) The applicant be held entitled to the benefit of decision referred in the O.A. as Annexure A-13 and A-14 and other related decision concerning grant of Compassionate Allowance.

(iv) That the applicant be held entitled to all consequential benefits and relief, from due dates, in the interest of justice.”

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant joined the service on 17.12.1970 on the post of Auditor (Re-designated as Senior Auditor). While the applicant was posted in the office of DEDO, Bathinda, he was involved in a case under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He was convicted by the CBI Court, Patiala vide judgment dated 23.12.1999 under section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 1-1/2 years and under section 13 (1) (d) read with section 13 (2) for imprisonment of one year. Both the sentences were order to run concurrently. He filed Criminal Appeal on 25.01.1999 and during pendency of appeal the sentenced imposed upon applicant was stayed by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.

3. The applicant further submitted that the respondents issued a show-cause notice dated 01.02.2020 to the applicant proposing imposition of penalty of dismissal from service to which he replied. However, the applicant was dismissed from service with immediate effect vide order dated 22.02.2000 under Rule 19(1) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 (Annexure A-2). The applicant filed CWP No. 6841 of 2000 challenging the dismissal order. The writ petition was transferred to this Tribunal vide order dated 06.02.2008 which was registered in Tribunal as Ο.Α. No. 150/PB/2008. That O.A. was decided by this Tribunal stating that the sentence awarded to the applicant has been stayed till the appeal is decided in favour of the applicant, no direction can be issued for reinstatement or otherwise. The applicant represented on 06.12.2006 requesting for grant of pensionary benefits considering his service of 29 years i.e. w.e.f. 17.12.1970 to 21.02.2000. The representation was rejected vide order dated 17.04.2007.

4. The aforesaid Criminal Appeal of the applicant was dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court on 10.02.2011, against which applicant filed criminal appeal No.1985 of 2011 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which was decided on 31.10.2011 modifying and reducing the punishment of 1-1/2 years’ sentence of the applicant to one year. He was sentenced for 1 (one year) in Central Jail Patiala. He was put on duty of teaching the jail inmates and he was appreciated by the Inspector General (Jails) and also given gifts by various NGOs, but was released from jail after nine months keeping in view his good conduct and excellent services as a teacher.

5. The applicant submitted representation dated 02.12.2017 with a request to grant him Compassionate Allowance in view of clarification letter dated 12.03.2017 and Rule 41 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, which was rejected by respondent no. vide order dated 03.01.2018. The applicant filed a review on 02.02.2018 (Annexure A-6) and the same was rejected vide order dated 15.03.2018. He filed O.A. No. 149/

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top