Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Vijay Pal Singh vs Delhi Transport Corporation, Govt. Of ... on 19 July, 2022
1
O.A. No.120/2015
Item No.8
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No. 120/2015
M.A. No.3368/2018
This the 19th day of July 2022
Hon'ble Mr. R N Singh, Member (J)
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A)
Vijay Pal Singh (Aged about 64 years),
S/o Late Sh. Harkesh,
R/o H.No.C-160, Gali No.3/23,
Village Gokul Pur, Delhi-94.
...Applicant
(By Advocate : Shri H.S. Saini)
Versus
1. The Depot Manager,
Delhi Transport Corporation,
Rohini III, Delhi.
2. Chairman-cum-Managing Director,
Delhi Transport Corporation,
DTC Head Quarters,
Indraprastha Estate, Near ITO, Delhi.
3. Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi,
Through Chief Secretary,
Delhi.
...Respondents
(By Advocate : Shri Saurabh Sharma for Shri Manish Garg)
2
O.A. No.120/2015
Item No.8
O R D E R (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A) :
MA No.3368/2018 In the present MA, the applicant has prayed for the following interim relief :-
"In view of the above submission this Hon'ble Court may be graciously be pleased to grant interim relief amounting to Rs.4,82,632/- (Rupee Four Lakh Eighty Two Thousand Sex Hundred Thirty Two only) prior finalisation of the present OA in the interest of justice in favour of applicant."
2. It is not in dispute that the matter is of the year 2015 and is listed for final hearing and the learned counsels for the parties are ready to argue the matter finally.
3. In the facts and circumstances, no separate adjudication is required in the present matter. Accordingly MA stands disposed of.
OA No.120/2015
4. The applicant herein is aggrieved by denial of enhanced Subsistence Allowance pursuant to the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC). By virtue of the present Original Application, he seeks the following relief(s) :-
3O.A. No.120/2015
Item No.8 "(a) The respondents to release the enhanced subsistence allowance in consonance with revised pay scales as per 6th Pay Commission to the applicant from the date of applicability of revised pay scales as per 6th pay commission w.e.f. 01.01.2006 till the date of his retirement with interest @18% per annum from due date till realization.
(b) Any other relief as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in favour of the applicant."
5. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was placed under suspension on some allegations of alleged misconduct in the year 2003. In accordance with the rules, he was awarded the Subsistence Allowance during the course of the suspension. During this period, the recommendations of the 6th CPC were accepted by the Government and adopted by the respondent organisation. However, vide order dated 30.12.2013, the applicant's request for enhancement of his Subsistence Allowance, in accordance with the pay as was to be fixed in his case pursuant to the recommendations of the 6th CPC, was rejected. While rejecting the said prayer, he was informed that his pay could not be fixed in accordance with the 6th CPC as he is under suspension. During the course of the hearing today, it is informed that the applicant retired in the year 2013, while under suspension. During the course 4 O.A. No.120/2015 Item No.8 of the arguments, we regret to know that none of the counsels is able to assist us, as neither any relevant rules governing the suspension and the Subsistence Allowance have been placed before us nor either of the counsel has placed any supporting documents to show whether enhanced Subsistence Allowance was to be paid to the applicant or denied to the applicant. So we are finally deciding this matter on the grounds that it is very old, the applicant has since been retired and the OA has been pending since the year 2015.
6. It transpires that the applicant remained suspended for a period of 10 years and during this period of 10 years, no disciplinary proceedings were either initiated against him or were concluded. We are informed that the applicant on his retirement has been given the retirement benefits and pension in accordance with the 5th CPC recommendations whereas subsequently two further Pay Commissions have given their reports/recommendations, which have been accepted by the respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents referred to some rules or instructions of the DOP&T, which according to him, stipulate that if a person is under suspension, he cannot be granted the benefit of next pay scale. To question as to for how long such denial can continue, he is unable to 5 O.A. No.120/2015 Item No.8 answer/satisfy us. Further, he has not placed before us any such instructions or rules which authorise the respondents to retire a person under suspension without giving him the benefit of latest pay scale. In such circumstances, we would not be in a position to either comment upon or adjudicate on the merits of the claim of the applicant. On the basis of documents available on case file with us, we have no hesitation in quashing the order passed by the respondents on 30.12.2013, bearing No.RD-3/PFC(C)/2013/4189 (Annexure-A/1), vide which, they have refused to fix the pay of the applicant in accordance with 6th CPC recommendations.
7. Accordingly, OA is disposed of with direction to the Competent Authority amongst the respondents to review the entire case of suspension and disciplinary proceedings against the applicant, strictly in accordance with the rules governing the suspension and take a decision afresh in the matter considering that the applicant has since retired from service and has been denied the benefit of either of the subsequent Pay Commissions and pension and retiral benefits accordingly. The Competent Authority amongst the respondents shall take a decision within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and pass a detailed speaking and reasoned order. We have 6 O.A. No.120/2015 Item No.8 neither examined nor commented upon the merits of the claim of the applicant, except the limited observations made in this order. The contents of this OA shall be taken into consideration while deciding the claim of the applicant.
8. The OA stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs.
( Tarun Shridhar ) ( R N Singh )
Member (A) Member (J)
/rk/