CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No. 4840/2025 This the 18th December, 2025 Hon’ble Mr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

Hon’ble Mr. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)

Vinod Kumar Son of Late Sh. Kishori Lal, resident of House No. 966, Street No. 06, Pappu Colony Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh - 201005 ………..Applicant (By Advocate : Mr Shrutnajaya Bhardwaj with Mr Yogesh)

VERSUS

1. Municipal Corporation of Delhi Through, Commissioner, located at Dr. S.P.M. Civic Centre, Minto Rd SKD Basti, Press Enclave, Ajmeri Gate, New Delhi, Delhi, 110002

2. Hindu Rao Hospital Through its Medical Superintendent, Malka Ganj, Delhi,110007 .... Respondents (By Advocate : Mr Akshit Gupta)

ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Mr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

By way of the present OA, the applicants is seeking the following relief(s):-

“8(a). Direct the Respondents to pay interest to the Applicant for the period from 31.03.2024 till 01.10.2025 at the rate applicable to General Provident Fund (i.e., 7.1% per annum compound interest) on the principal amount of ₹10,76,625, or such higher interest as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit in the facts of this case;

b. Direct the Respondents to pay interest to the Applicant on the amount computed in prayer (a) above, for the period from 01.10.2025 till the date of actual payment at the rate of 12% per annum; and c. Pass any such other orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of this case.”

2. Factual matrix of the case is that applicant was serving with the respondents w.e. f 27.04.1982 and he retired on superannuation on 31.03.2024. The applicant has received all the retiral benefits. However, he received gratuity in two installment i.e. first installment of 50% was gratuity was paid on 19.11.2024 and second of 50% on 01.10.2025. The applicant submitted representation on 12.09.2025 for granting interest on delayed payment for gratuity from the date when they were due.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the respondents have not yet taken any decision on the applicant’s representation dated 12.09.2025 regarding payment of interest on delayed release of gratuity. Being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents, the applicant has been constrained to file the present OA seeking the aforementioned reliefs.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant places reliance upon Rule 65(1) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, which mandates payment of interest on delayed payment of pensionary benefits, including gratuity, where such delay is attributable to administrative reasons. It is contended that the delay in the present case was not on account of any lapse or fault of the applicant, but was purely administrative in nature, and therefore, the applicant is entitled to interest strictly in accordance with the said Rules.

4. He further submits that the issue is no longer res integra, in view of the Full Bench decision of this Tribunal in OA No. 2821/2023, decided on 30.10.2025, wherein it has been categorically held that interest on delayed payment of gratuity is payable at the rate applicable to the General Provident Fund, calculated on a compound basis, as envisaged under Rule 65 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 5. Learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. Akshit Gupta who accepts notice, does not dispute the fact that the gratuity amount was released in two installments and that there was a delay in payment. However, he submits that he would like to seek appropriate instructions from the respondents with regard to the claim for interest.

6. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant would be satisfied if the present OA is treated as a supplementary representation, and the respondents are directed to decide the applicant’s pending representation, including the prayer made in the present OA, by passing a reasoned and speaking order on the issue of interest on delayed payment of gratuity.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents has no obj