Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member, Diwakar Singh, Judicial Member
K. K. Pradhan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant's service history and reliefs sought (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. applicant's grounds: delay and procedural violations (Para 3) |
| 3. respondents defend delay, upsc non-consultation (Para 4) |
| 4. rejoinder: upsc consultation mandatory under pension rules (Para 5) |
| 5. timeline summary and key dispute points (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. inordinate delay vitiates proceedings if prejudicial (Para 12) |
| 7. cvc advice requires prior co representation (Para 13) |
| 8. mandatory upsc consultation for pension cut (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 9. judicial review scope in disciplinary matters (Para 17) |
| 10. proceedings quashed; recoveries refunded (Para 18 , 19) |
O R D E R
Per Hon’ble Mr. Suchitto Kumar Das, Administrative Member :
1. The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for the following relief(s):
“(a) An order holding that the impugned order dated 17.06.2021 imposing penalty of 30% cut in pension & gratuity, being violative of CVC Circular dated 23.05.2000 and 1st proviso of Rule 9(1) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 is not maintainable and liable to be quashed.
(b) An order holding that the applicant is entitled to continue with full pen
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
