Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi Order reserved on : 27.11.2025 Order pronounced on : 09.01.2026 Hon’ble Mr. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)

Chander Parkash, Dy. Director (Survey), DDA (Retd.), House No.209 R, New Colony, Gurugram-122001.

...Applicant.

(By Advocate: Shri Vivin Kumar Ahuja with Shri Aviral Batra ) Versus Delhi Development Authority through its Vice Chairman, B Block, 1st Floor, Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi-110023.

...Respondents.

(By Advocate : Mrs. Sriparna Chatterjee)

RACHNA KAPOOR

RACHNA KAPOOR

Date: 2026.01.12

O R D E R

The OA narrates the brief facts of the case that the applicant joined DDA on 21.01.1980 as Surveyer. He was further promoted to the post of Assistant Director (Survey) in March, 1989. The applicant was due for promotion to the next higher post of Deputy Director (Survey) in 2010-11 and the DPC for the said purpose was also supposed to meet on 16.10.2010. However, on 06.10.2010, the applicant was served with a suspension order. The DPC was convened and the junior of the applicant was promoted to the post of Deputy Director (Survey) and the name of the applicant was placed under sealed cover. The applicant preferred various representations, however, no reason whatsoever was ever conveyed to the applicant for his suspension. No charge sheet was Digitally signed by also issued to the applicant. The suspension of the RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.12 17:21:59+05'30'

applicant was revoked on 24.02.2014 (Annexure-A/2). 2. Subsequently, the applicant was promoted to the post of Deputy Director (Survey) vide order dated 19.05.2015 after opening the sealed cover. The applicant retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 29.02.2016. However, the respondents have not released the pensionary benefits to the applicant till date. Being aggrieved, the applicant has filed the present OA seeking the following relief(s) :-

“a) Direct the respondents to release the pensionary benefits to the applicant.

b) Fix the pension of the applicant as per the recommendation of Seventh pay Commission.

c) Pass any other order or orders as deemed fit in the circumstance of the case.”

3. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that when no criminal case/ departmental proceeding are pending against the applicant nor was he under suspension on the date of retirement, non-issuance of retiral benefits is illegal and arbitrary.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR action of the respondents in withholding the RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.12

retirement benefits of the applicant is illegal,

arbitrary, discriminatory and bad in law, as no charge

sheet has been issued against the applicant till date

and no criminal or disciplinary proceedings have been

initiated against the applicant.

5. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the following judgments : (i) Decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in Rajinder Kumar Nangia Vs. Rashtriya Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. 2002(1) MHLJ518 dated 10.10.2001.

(ii) Decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in B.B.

Rajendra Prasad Vs. Union of India & Ors.

2023 LawSuit(Bom) 1862 dated 26.09.2023.

(iii) Decision of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in V.P.

Singh Vs. Govt.of NCT of Delhi & Ors. WP(C)

No.2935/2010 dated 15.07.2010.

(iv) Decision of Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in Union of India & Anr. Vs. Shri J.P. Sharma WP(C)

No.6465/2003 dated 04.07.2008.

6. Pursuant to notice, the respondents have filed their counter reply opposing the OA. Learned counsel Digitally signed by RACHNA KAPOOR RACHNA KAPOOR Date: 2026.01.12

collision with other DDA officials committed criminal

misconduct by abusing their official position as public

servant in fraudulently allotting the plots, during the

year 1988-89. The CVC vide OM dated 25.02.2008

directed to conduct investigation into the matter.

With respect to those allegations, the applicant was suspended with immediate effect vide order dated 06.10.2010. An enquiry was c