Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad

Nathan Singh vs Col. Prerit, Commander Works Eng.Air ... on 2 December, 2025

                                                                       (Reserved on 16.10.2025)

                             CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
                                    ALLAHABAD BENCH
                                       ALLAHABAD

            ALLAHABAD, this the 02nd day of December, 2025

            Present:

            HON'BLE MR. RAJNISH KUMAR RAI, MEMBER-J.
            HON'BLE MRS. MANJU PANDEY, MEMBER-A.

            Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No.04 of 2021
            IN
            Original Application No.278 of 2019

            Nathan Singh, Aged about 59 years, S/o Late Chhedi Lal, R/o AG,
            MES Colony, Air Force, Varanasi.
                                                                   ​     ............Petitioner.
                                               VERSUS

            1. ​ Col. Prerit, Commander works Engineer, Air Force, Allahabad.
            2. ​ Maj. S. S. Ramlod, Chief Engineer, Air Force, Gorakhpur.


                                                               ​ . . . . . . Opposite parties


             Advocate for the petitioners: ​​           Mr. Abhishek Pandey
                                                        Mr. Jitendra Nath Pandey
             Advocate for the respondents:​             Mr. Chakrapani Vatsyayan
                                                   ORDER

By Hon'ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member(J):-

Mr. Jitendra Nath Pandey, counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Chakrapani Vatsyayan, counsel for the respondents are present and heard.

2.​ This instant contempt petition under section 17 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, has been filed for non-compliance of the order dated 18.11.2020 passed in O.A. No.278 of 2019, whereby the following direction has been issued:

"10. ​ The impugned order of the respondents, therefore, is set aside, as it fails to meet the statutory requirements. The date of birth of the applicant shall remain ás ARPITA SRIVASTAV 20.08.1961/in accordance with the entry made in his service book at the time of his initial appointment in the year 1984 as any change made thereafter has to be strictly in accordance with the rules, which is not the case here. Accordingly, the applicant shall attain the age of superannuation on 31.08.2021 and shall be retired accordingly. The period from 31st March, 2019 when the applicant was retired on the basis of his amended date of birth and the date on which he rejoins duties in compliance of these orders, may be regularized by sanctioning the applicant leave of the kind due. "

3.​ From a perusal of the above direction, it appears that the respondents were directed to correct the date of birth of the applicant to 20.08.1961, and accordingly he would attain the age of superannuation on 31.08.2021, upon which he shall be retired. The second part of the order provides that the period from 31.03.2019, when the applicant was retired on the basis of the amended date of birth, until the date on which he rejoins duties in compliance with these orders, may be regularized by sanctioning the applicant leave of the kind due.

4.​ The respondents have filed their compliance affidavit as well as compliance affidavits 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 on 07.03.2021, 08.04.2024, 25.08.2024, 08.09.2025, and objections thereto have also been filed by the applicant. A perusal of the affidavit dated 08.04.2024 (page 31, paragraph 2 of Order P.T.O. No.14/2024 dated 01.04.2024) shows that, in pursuance of the CAT order dated 18.11.2020, as well as the High Court order dated 02.03.2023 in Writ Petition No.17701 of 2021, the applicant's date of birth was accepted as 20.08.1961 and necessary correction was carried out. Thus, the first part of the order regarding correction of the date of birth was complied with. As regards the second part of the order concerning regularization of the period from 31.03.2019 to 31.08.2021, it is evident from page 30 of the affidavit dated 08.04.2024 that the applicant was sanctioned 380 days Earned Leave, 440 days Half Pay Leave, and 100 days Extraordinary Leave (EoL) up to the date of superannuation (31.08.2021). After adjusting the amount already received by the applicant against Earned Leave, Half Pay Leave, and EoL, the recalculated details have been annexed to the compliance affidavit dated 08.04.2024 at pages 19-23, and the necessary calculations have been provided in paragraph 3 of the affidavit. Respondents have filed their compliance affidavit as well as affidavit of compliance 1,2,3,4 and 5 filed on 07.03.2021, 08.04.2024, 25.08.2024, 08.09.2025 and objection to the same has also been filed by the applicant. From perusal of the affidavit dated 08.04.2024 it appears that from page 31 i.e. paragraph 2 of the order P.T.O. No.14/2024 dated 01.04.2024 vide which it has been observed that in pursuance to the C.A.T. order dated 18.11.2020 was well as in High Court order dated 02.03.2023 ARPITA SRIVASTAV in Writ Petition No.17701 of 2021, the date of birth of the applicant was accepted as 20.08.1961 and accordingly, the amendment was made, therefore, the first part of order with regard to correction in the date of birth was allowed in the second part of the order, with regard to the period from 31.03.2019 to 31.08.2021 shall be regularized by sanctioning the applicants leave of the kind due. From the affidavit dated 08.04.2024 page 30 it is evident that the applicants leave of 380 days Earned Leave pay, 440 Health Pay Leave and 100 days EoL was sanctioned till the date of superannuation i.e. 31.08.2021 and after adjusting the aforesaid leave payment received by the applicant against the Earned Leave, Half Days Pay Leave and EoL was recalculated, which has been annexed along with the affidavit of compliance dated 08.04.2024, pages 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 and the necessary calculation has also been proved DETAILS OF COMMUTATION IN RESPECT OF MES-433226 SHRI NATHAN SINGH, MASON SK RETD ON 31 MAR 2019 AND RE-INSTATED UPTO 31 AUG 2021 (DOB) BY HON, BLE CAT 1- Basic Pay​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Rs​ ​ 35300 2- Basic Pension​ ​ ​ ​ Rs​ ​ 17650 3- Residual Pension​ ​ ​ ​ Rs​ ​ 10590 4- Commuted 40% of Pension​ ​ Rs​ ​ 7060 7060 x 12 x 8.194​ ​ ​ ​ Rs​ ​ 694196 Commutation Due​ ​ ​ ​ Rs​ ​ 694196 Commutation already paid​ ​ ​ Rs (-)​ ​ 694196 ​​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 0 APPROX PENSION DETAILS IN RESPECT OF MES-433426 SHRI NATHAN SINGH, MASON SK RETIRED ON 31 MAR 2019 (FOR THE PERIOD FROM APR 2019 TO AUG 2021) 1​​ Basic Pay on Retirement​ ​ Rs​ ​ 35300 2​ Basic Pension​ ​ ​ Rs​ ​ 17650 _______ 3​ Residual Pension​ ​ ​ Rs​ ​ 10590 4​ DA on Basic pension & 12%​ Rs​ ​ 2118 5​​ Medical Allowance ​​ Rs​ ​ 1000 Total Monthly Pension ​ ​ ​ ​ 13708 ARPITA SRIVASTAV DETAILS OF PENSION Ser​ Period ​ ​ ​ Amount ​ Months No 1 ​ Apr-Jun 2019 ​ ​ 13708​ ​ 3​ 41124​ ​ DA 12% on Basic Pension 2 ​ Jul 2019 to Jun 2020​ 14591​ ​ 12​ 175092​​ DA 17% on Basic Pension 3 ​ Jul 2020 to Jun 2021​ 14591 ​ ​ 12​ 175092​​ DA 17% on Basic Pension 4​ Jul 2021 to Aug 2021​ 17062​ ​ 2​ 34124​ ​ DA 31% on Basic Pension Total​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 425432 NET ENTITLEMENTS OF PAY AND ALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF MES-433426 SHRI NATHAN SINGH MASON SK RETIRED ON 31 MAR 2019 AND RE-INSTATED UPTO 31 AUG 2021 BY HON,BLE CAT 1​ Pay and allowance wef Apr 19 to Aug 2021​ ​ Rs ​ 701799 2​ Pension worked out wef Apr 19 to Aug 2021​ ​ Rs ​ 425432 Net entitlements​ ​ ​ Rs ​ 276367 3​ LEC Already Paid​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Rs​ 395360 Net Due​ ​ ​ ​ Rs ​ -118993 DETAILS OF GRATUITY IN RESPECT OF MES-433226 SHRI NATHAN SINGH, MASON SK RETD ON 31 MAR 2019 AND RE-INSTATED UPTO 31 AUG 2021 1​ Basic Pay​ ​ DA 31%​ ​ Total 35300​​ ​ 10943​​ ​ 46243x33/2​ ​ 763010 2​ Gratuity Already Paid ​ ​ ​ ​ Rs ​ ​ 587110 ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ 6,52,344 Amount Due​763010​ (-)​ 587110​ =​ 175900 652344​ ​ 1,10,666 763010 652344 ​​ ​ ​ ​ 1,10,666 ARPITA SRIVASTAV

5.​ The contention of the applicant that he has not getting any benefit after the change of correction in the date of birth in the said amount paid to the applicant on account EoL and other D.C.R.G.s were on account of adjustment of EoL from the salary of the extended period i.e. from 31.03.2019 to 31.08.2021.

6.​ Considering the above submission and filed position it is apparent that the order with regard to date of birth and date of retirement has been complied with and the second part of with regard to regularization of the period from 31.03.2019 was also regularized by sanctioning EoL, Half pay Leave, Extraordinary Leave and payment which was made to the applicant and the payee salary for which he was entitled he was calculated after 31.03.2019 and in which tabulation they have stated the fact with regard to. If the applicant is still aggrieved by the regularization of EoL, Half Pay Leave, Extraordinary Leave, or by the method of calculating financial benefits, it is open to him to approach the proper forum, if he so desires.

7.​ In view of the above, C.P. No. 04 of 2021 is closed. The notices stand discharged.

8.​ Accordingly, the contempt proceedings stand dropped.

9.​ All pending M.A.s, if any, also stand disposed of.

                  (Manju Pandey) ​     ​      ​             ​      (Rajnish Kumar Rai)
                    Member (A)                      ​            ​     Member (J)
             /Arpita/




 ARPITA
SRIVASTAV