Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Lal Chand vs Delhi Transport Corporation, Govt. Of ... on 5 October, 2018
1
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench
OA No. 1584/2017
New Delhi this the 5th day of October, 2018
Hon'ble Ms. Nita Chowdhury, Member (A)
Lal Chand (aged 62 years)
Group „B‟
Ex-ATI,
Token No.29665, DTC,
R/o 407-B, Gali No.2,
Than Singh, Nagar,
Anand Parvat, New Delhi - Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr. T.N. Tripathi)
Versus
1. Delhi Transport Corporation,
Through its CMD,
DTC Headquarter,
Indraprastha, New Delhi
2. The Manager,
Delhi Transport Corporation,
Shadipur Depot, New Delhi - Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. Anurag Sharma for Ms. Ruchira Gupta)
O R D E R (ORAL)
This Original Application (OA) has been filed by the applicant seeking the following reliefs:-
2
"(a) Direct the respondents to grant/sanction pension and pensionary benefits along with interest w.e.f. 30.6.2015 and pay the arrears after adjusting the PF amount paid by the respondent i.e. 5,48,595/- as PF on 16.2.2016.
(b) Pass any other order as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
(c) Allow cost in favour of the applicant."
2. It is the case of the applicant that the respondents are not paying him pension and pensionary benefits. The respondents have never asked him for an option with regard to pension and as per rules, those, who do not submit an option, would automatically be included under the scheme of pension on retirement. However, on his retirement, the respondents are now stating that as he never opted for the Pension Scheme, they are not duty bound to give him any pension. He also states that copy of his service book and pay slip squarely shows that the applicant was to be treated as being given the benefit of the Pension Scheme but without his consent, they have now declared that they had made a clerical mistake in declaring him an pension optee and accordingly, they have credited an amount of R.5,48,595/- in his PPF Account on 16.02.2016. The applicant states that he is ready to refund this amount which has been deposited without his consent and the respondents be directed 3 to give him pensionary benefits from the date of his retirement. He has submitted a number of representations in this regard, but no positive action has been taken since his retirement on 30.06.2015.
3. The respondents have sought to controvert the claim of the applicant by stating that the applicant had not opted for the Pension Scheme but due to non-availability of his personal record, the applicant was mistakenly shown as having opted for pension when he re-joined the respondents on reinstatement in the year 2003. They have also admitted that from 2003 to 2015, the applicant continued to be shown as a pension optee due to clerical error on their part. They also admit that the Pension Scheme has been made compulsory for the new employees joining Corporation as per the Office Order No.16 dated 27.11.1992.
4. In view of the fact that the respondents themselves have treated the applicant as a pension optee right from the date of his reinstatement till his retirement, i.e., from 2003 till 2015. It is totally unjustified on their part to inform him on the date of his retirement that on account of their clerical mistake, he was wrongly treated as pension optee and will now be treated as non-pension 4 optee. Had the respondents informed the applicant that they will treat him as a non-pension optee in time, he could have made his representation and also sought the relief to be considered under the Pension Scheme when he was reinstated in 2003. Quite simply because the applicant was dismissed from service and reinstated in 2003, his option must have been informed to him at the time of his reinstatement. As the same was not done and he continued to be under the impression that he was a pension optee, it is now not open to the respondents to treat the applicant as non-pension optee after treating him as a pension optee for more than 13 years and also not fair on their part to have suo motu deposited the amount PF without his consent. Hence, the respondents are directed to pass an order treating the applicant as a pension optee and sanction pension under Pension Scheme. Moreover, the respondents may now recover the amount deposited by them to the PF Account of the applicant on 16.02.2016 and pay pension only after recovering the refunded amount. In the peculiar facts of this case, no interest shall be payable if pension is released within 90 days after the applicant refunds amounts credited to him by the respondents on 16.02.2016.
5
5. With the above directions, the OA stands allowed. No costs.
(Nita Chowdhury) Member (A) /lg/