CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI.

ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.270/2024 th Date of Decision : 11 June, 2025 CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Shri Krishna, Member (A)

Smt. Aramoni Das (Wife and Legal Representative of Late Shri Kripa Sagar Das, Deputy Commissioner (Income Tax) (Retd.)

Age:54 years Address : C-105, Krishna Heights, Upper Govind Nagar, Malad (East)

Applicant Malad (East) – 400 097. ... (By Advocate Shri Jose Pulikkoden)

VERSUS

1. The Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi, 110 001, India.

2. Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 20.

3. Under Secretary (V&L)-I C.B.D.T., Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Respondents Govt of India, New Delhi. ... ( By Advocate Shri N.K. Rajpurohit )

ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsels for both the parties at length.

. The legal heir of the deceased employee has filed this OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 on 04th March, 2024 to claim the release of leave salary encashment as per the accumulated earned leave at the time of superannuation in 2019 and payment of 8% interest on leave salary dues payable and also for award of cost.

3 . Brief facts of the case are that the applicant’s late husband was compulsorily retired under FR 56(j) on 27th September, 2019. He expired on 10th January, 2024.

. It is the case of the applicant that there was no charge of embezzlement against the deceased employee and there was no apprehension of any recovery on conclusion of pending enquiries.

. It has been further submitted that no formal order was passed for withholding the leave encashment. The respondents have paid the leave encashment salary on 28th June, 2024 during the pendency of this OA.

6 . Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there has been delay of more than four years in payment of leave encashment salary to the applicant without there being any formal order to withhold the leave encashment salary. Thus, the deceased employee has been deprived of his legal dues for more than four years and, therefore, he is entitled for payment of interest @8% which is required to be paid to the legal heir/applicant.

7 . Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Dr. Poornima Advani Supreme Court in the case of & Anr. Vs. Government of NCT & Anr., Civil Appeal No.2643/2025 decided on 18th February, 2025 in which the Hon’ble Apex Court was pleased to direct the respondents to pay an amount of Rs.4,35,968/- towards interest on dues to the petitioner therein. He further places reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Professor Sachidanand Sinha Vs.

the case of Jawaharlal Nehru University in W.P.(C) 16488/2024 decided on 28th November, 2024 in which the Hon’ble High Court was pleased to hold that the petitioner was entitled to leave encashment and also entitled to grant of interest for 27 months @9%. He further places reliance on the decision Sayed Mohammed of this Tribunal in the case of Javed Vs. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi & 2 Ors. in OA No.744/2022 decided on 22nd February, 2024 in which interest @7% was granted on the payment of leave salary encashment.

. After issuance of notice, the respondents have filed their reply in which they have stated that they have already paid leave encashment salary to the deceased employee. However, they have contested the payment of interest. It has been contended that the applicant’s husband was compulsorily retired under FR 56(j) on 27th September, 2019. It has been submitted that three memorandums under Rule 14 of the CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965 were issued for the disciplinary proceedings on 30th March, 2011, 30th August, 2011 and 23rd August, 2012. It has been submitted that the officer was granted Provisional Pension in terms of Rule 69(i)(a)(b) of CSS Pension Rules, 1972 from the date following the date of retirement up to and including the date on whic