Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Suresh Kumar Batra, J, Rashmi Saxena Sahni, A
Mahal Chand – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details reliefs sought and factual background of conviction. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. parties' contentions on rule 2.2 applicability. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. framing issue on full pension withholding legality. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. rule 2.2(a) caps withholding at 1/3rd post-conviction. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. quash orders; direct fresh compliant order. (Para 12 , 13) |
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 impugned order of the Respondent No.3 20.09.2018 conveyed vide Endst. No. 20.09.2018 277454/E- 1367(11) dated [A-7), whereby penalty of withholding whole pension of the Applicant with effect from the date of his conviction on 21.04.2018 has been imposed;
(ii) To quash the order of the Appellate Authority (Respondent No.2) dated 03.05.2019, conveyed vide Endst. No. 0015/2018- EO(R&J)/2019/ 7876 dated 15.05.2019 25.11.2016 [A-9], whereby the Appeal preferred by the Applicant has been dismissed;
(iii) After quashing the aforesaid orders, a direction may kindly be issued to respondents to restore the pension, permissible in
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
