CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM BENCH Original Application No.180/00670/2022 Wednesday this the 18^th day of February 2026 C O R A M :

HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE K.HARIPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE Ms.V.RAMA MATHEW, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER B.Santhoshkumar, S/o.B.Balakrishna Pillai, Aged 49 years, Retired Junior Clerk, Personnel Branch, Southern Railway, Thiruvananthapuram Division, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 014.

Residing at Sreebala, House No.122, Gandhi Nagar, Ashramam P.O., Kollam – 691 002. ...Applicant (By Advocates Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy, Mrs.Kala.T.Gopi, Mrs.Nishitha Balachandran & Ms.Renuka.M.R.)

v e r s u s

1. Union of India represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway, Headquarters Office, Park Town P.O., Chennai – 600 003.

2. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 014.

3. The Senior Divisional Finance Manager, Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division, Thiruvananthapuram – 695 014. ...Respondents (By Advocate Mr.Sreejith.N)

This application having been heard on 30^th January, 2026 the Tribunal on 18^th February 2026 delivered the following :

O R D E R

HON'BLE Ms.V.RAMA MATHEW, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER The applicant in this case commenced his service under the respondents on 03.06.1993. He was compulsorily retired from service with effect from 12.03.2015 on allegations of unauthorized absence. He is aggrieved by the refusal on the part of the respondents to release his retirement gratuity.

2. It is submitted that the applicant while continuing in service was issued with a charge memo on allegations of unauthorized absence which resulted in the imposition of the penalty of compulsory retirement as per order dated 11.03.2015, produced as Annexure A-1. Against the same the applicant had submitted an appeal to the Appellate Authority viz., the Additional Railway Manager. However, his appeal was rejected vide letter dated 25.04.2016, produced as Annexure A-2. He had filed a revision dated 15.07.2016 against Annexure A-2 to the Chief Personnel Officer/Administration which was returned by letter dated 21.02.2020 stating that the Revision Petition is to be addressed to the Chief Personnel Officer (Industrial Relations). Accordingly he had addressed the revision petition to the aforesaid authority. However, this too was rejected by letter dated 22.02.2021, produced as Annexure A-3. It is pointed out that the Annexure A-3 was, however, issued only by the Chief Personnel Officer/Administration. It is submitted that even though he was imposed with a penalty of compulsory retirement by Annexure A-1 order dated 11.03.2015 he was not issued with the pension papers nor was he granted pension or other retirement benefits. It was only after Annexure A-3 revision order the respondents issued the Pension Payment Order on 01.05.2022. Even thereafter the retirement gratuity due to him was not paid. He claims that no reasons was given. Hence the representation dated 15.05.2022 was addressed to the 2^nd respondent requesting release of his retirement gratuity and other benefits, produced as Annexure A-4. Since no communication was forthcoming he submitted another representation dated 13.06.2022 addressed to the Public Information Officer in the office of the 2^nd respondent requesting the release of retirement gratuity. In response a communication dated 08.06.2022 was issued stating inter-alia that the DCRG is being withheld for want of Certification from 'IOW, Quilon' (present designation Senior Section Engineer/Works) regarding vacation of the quarters. This was not produced as it is stated that it is not legible.

3. The applicant submitted that he had vacated his quarters in time which fact was also communicated to the authorities in the settlement papers submitted by him. Hence he cannot be held responsible for any certification to be issued by the IOW, Kollam. Further, it is pointed out that the quarters in question was condemned long ago by the Railway authorities. Therefore, the refusal