The lack of a tripartite agreement precludes the Central Government from deducting dues from DCRG payable to absorbed employees.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 15^th day of January, 2026

[W.P.(C) Nos.16678 of 2023 and 18930 of 2024]

The petitioner is an Employees’ Co-operative Society, the members of which are former employees of the Post and Telecom Department. The 6^th respondent in both the writ petitions were absorbed in the BSNL, when the BSNL was constituted in the year 2000. The 6^th respondent in both the cases availed financial advance / loan from the petitioner- Society.

2. While availing the loan, the petitioner obtained a declaration from the 6^th respondent who undertook that loan dues can be recovered from their salary / DCRG / pension dues. The 6^th respondent in both the writ petitions opted for VRS before their due superannuation date. The 6^th respondent did not repay the amount promptly. The petitioner- Society requested the BSNL and the Central Government to recover the dues payable to the Society from the DCRG payable to the 6^th respondent.

3. The 6^th respondent being absorbed employees, DCRG is being paid by the Central Government. The Central Government took a stand that there is no agreement / contract / undertaking in respect of recovery and payment of the DCRG payable by the Central Government.

4. The petitioner, therefore, has approached this Court seeking to direct the respondents to deduct the dues of the 6^th respondent towards the petitioner-Society, as demand by the petitioner in Ext.P5, from the DCRG amount payable to the 6^th respondent and to pay the same to the petitioner- Society.

5. The contention of the petitioner is that the 6^th respondents have given undertaking / consent for recovery of any dues to the Society from the DCRG payable. Though the declaration is given to the BSNL, it should be treated as a consent given by the 6^th respondent for recovery from salary / DCRG / pension benefits payable to the 6^th respondent.

6. The petitioner also relied on Decision No.2 under Rule 73 of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules , 1972 and pointed out that the Government of India has decided in consultation with the Ministries concerned that in case the prematurely retired official gives a declaration to his Disbursing Officer, recovery of outstanding dues of Co-operative Societies from his DCRG can be made and remitted to the Society. Therefore, what is to be looked into is whether the 6^th respondent has given a declaration to the Disbursing Officer. The 6^th respondent has given Exts.P1, P2 and P3 declarations in this regard. Therefore, the Central Government Officers are compellabe to deduct the DCRG amount payable to the 6^th respondent and remit it towards the dues payable to the petitioner-Society.

7. Senior Panel Counsel representing respondents 1, 2 and 5 submitted that the 6^th respondent in both the writ petitions being erstwhile Central Government employees, as per the terms of the contract, the Government is liable to pay DCRG amount directly to the 6^th respondent. There is no tripartite agreement or contract involving the petitioner- Society, the 6^th respondent and the Government of India. Therefore, the petitioner cannot contend that the Government has to deduct the DCRG payable to the 6^th respondent.

8. Counsel for the 6^th respondent also resisted the writ petitions. The counsel for the 6^th respondent denied all the allegations made by the petitioner-Society. It is submitted that as there is no agreement with the Central Government, the DCRG payable to the 6^th respondent cannot be recovered from the Central Government. Furthermore, the counsel for the 6^th respondent submitted that as per the general laws on Gratuity and as per the provisions contained in