Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi Order reserved on : 26.11.2025 Order pronounced on : 09.01.2026 Hon’ble Mr. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)

Dr. Sudhir Bajaj, Aged 64 years, S/o Late Shri B.L. Bajaj, Gp.A/Retirement Dues, R/o H.No.A-11, Anand Vihar, Delhi-92.

...Applicant (By Advocate : Mr. U. Srivastava)

Versus

1. Union of India, through The Secretary, M/o Health & Family Welfare, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-01. 2. The Medical Superintendent, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital, Govt. of India, New Delhi-01. ...Respondents (By Advocate : Mr. Rajeev Kumar)

O R D E R

The applicant has filed this OA under Section

19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief(s) :-

“a) Directing the respondents to place the relevant records pertaining to the present O.A. before their lordships for the proper adjudication in the matter in the interest of justice b) Quash and setting aside the impugned order dt. 23.02.24 (Annexure A/1) declining the request of the applicant for releasing the post-retirement dues including regular pension; further c) Directing the respondents to release the post-retirement dues and regular pension etc as per entitlement of the applicant in accordance with the relevant rules and instructions on the subject d) Allowing the OA of the applicant with all other consequential benefits and costs.

e) Any other fit and proper relief may also be granted.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed as GDMO w.e.f. 05.08.1988 and deputed at Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Hospital in CHS.

Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR

u/s 420/406/467/468/471/34 of IPC at PS Anand

Vihar along with multiple cases. He was under

detention and released on interim bail on 04.05.2020.

The applicant was placed under deemed suspension in terms of Rule 10(2) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 vide order dated 12.01.2022 (Annexure-A/2 Colly) w.e.f. 26.09.2018 till 03.10.2020 and from 06.04.2021 till 25.01.2022 and the intervening period of 04.10.2020 till 05.04.2021 has been treated as revoked and the period has been treated as spent on duty. The second spell of the deemed suspension expired on

25.01.2022.

3. The applicant was compulsorily retired from service under FR 56(j) on 25.01.2022 with immediate effect with a direction that he shall be paid a sum equivalent to the amount of his pay and allowances for a period of three months calculated in lieu of notice period at the same rate at what he was supposed to be drawing them immediately before his retirement.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that as per Rule 10(6) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, the Digitally signed by Suspension Review Committee has reviewed the RACHNA KAPOOR

suspension period of the applicant and has

recommended revocation of suspension w.e.f.

26.01.2022. The Disciplinary Authority has also

approved the recommendation of the Suspension Review Committee for revocation of suspension of the applicant w.e.f. 26.01.2022, and the at the same time the respondents issued an order dated 25.01.2022, making the applicant retired from service under FR 56(j). Thereafter the respondents issued an order dated 12.04.2022 (Annexure-A/5) processing the case of the applicant for sanction/release of provisional pension as per the provisions of Rule 31(4) and 32(3) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 for the purpose of determining the emoluments of pension and in view of pending court/criminal proceedings against the applicant it was requested to sanction/release provisional pension to the applicant in view of the provisions contained in Rule 8(3) and 8(4) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021. Accordingly, the respondents issued an order dated 29.04.2022 to this effect.

5. The applicant preferred several representations including the one dated 20.07.2023 (Annexure-A/6 colly). However, the respondents rejected the claim of Digitally signed by

dated 23.02.2024 (Annexure-A/1). The said order

dated 23.02.2024 reads as under :-

“This is in reference to your representations dated 13.