CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH Dated this the 16^th day of December, Two Thousand Twenty Five CORAM :

HON'BLE MR M. SWAMINATHAN. MEMBER (J)

AND HON'BLE MR. M.L. SRIVASTAVA MEMBER(A)

P. S. Srinivas, No.19, NS English County, Bannerghatta, Bangalore .. Applicant By Advocate M/s M. Munian Vs.

1. Union of India rep by The Chairman, Executive Council NIEPMD &

Joint Secretary, Ministry of Social Justice, Government of India, (Department of Empowerment of Person With Disabilities (Divyangjan)

th

5 Floor, B wing, Paryavaran Bhavan, CGO complex, New Delhi.

2. The Director, NIEPMD, Ministry of SJ & Empowerment ECR, Muttukadu, Chennai. .. Respondents By Advocate Mr. Su. Srinivasan, SCGSC

ORDER

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member)

This OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief:

“To call for the records relating to impugned order (1) F.No.13-5/2006/NI and (2) F.No.8-12/2-17-NI, dated st

21.09.2016 & May 2018 respectively both passed by the 1 respondent through his Under Secretary to the Government of India imposing the penalty of with holding of 25% of monthly pension otherwise admissible to the applicant permanently and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to restore the full pension to the applicant form the date of with- holding and forthwith pay the arrears of with-held pension with interest and pass an order of permanent injunction restraining the respondents and their pay accounts office from effecting recoveries @ 25% of monthly pension otherwise admissible to the applicant and to pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case”.

2. The facts leading to the filing of the OA are as follows:

The applicant, a Post Graduate, joined AIIMS, New Delhi as a Speech Therapist on 05.05.1973. He was later selected by the Government of India, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, for the post of Assistant Professor in Speech Therapy and Audiology on 01.03.1985. He served for 37 years with an unblemished record until his retirement on 30.04.2010. According to him, he remained in the same post without any career progression. He states that although he was purely an academic professional, he was unnecessarily implicated in an accounts-related matter. Just before his retirement, in February 2010, the 1st respondent issued a Charge Memo alleging discrepancies and irregularities during his tenure as Director-in-Charge of CRC, Guwahati (2003–2006). He contends that this was a punitive and vindictive action, undertaken because he had filed several court cases, initially at Guwahati and later before the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal, seeking his basic service benefits. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, and after his retirement, the proceedings were converted under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, where they still remain pending. The applicant submits that the alleged events occurred between 2003 and 2006, and that it is unjust and excessively delayed to impose a penalty in 2016 over a decade later and seven years after his superannuation. By order dated 21.09.2016, the 1st respondent permanently withheld 25% of his monthly pension. His pension was sanctioned only pursuant to the Tribunal’s order in OA No. 534 of 2011, and after all statutory remedies had been exhausted, as further directed in MA No. 183 of 2015 in the same OA, five years after his retirement. However, immediately after sanctioning the pension, the 1st respondent imposed the penalty of forfeiting 25% of the pension. The applicant states that even the Office Order sanctioning his pension has not been issued, leaving his family, including two daughters, in a precarious financial situation. Following the Tribunal’s direction in OA No. 1622 of 2017, the applicant filed an appeal regarding the grievance, but the 1st respondent rejected it in May 2018.

That rejection is also under challenge in the current OA.

3