Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Raghubar Dayal vs G.N.C.T. Of Delhi on 16 September, 2008
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH O.A. No.513/2008 New Delhi this the 16th day of September, 2008 Honble Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J) Raghubar Dayal, S/o late Shri Ant Ram R/o D-16, West Jyoti Nagar Extension, Street No.8, Delhi-110094. -Applicant (By Advocate: Shri Gulab Chandra) Versus 1. G.N.C.T. of Delhi, through the Chief Secretary, Secretariat, I.P. Estate, New Delhi-110002. 2. The Director of Education, Directorate of Education, Old Secretariat, Delhi. -Respondents (By Advocate: Mrs. P.K. Gupta) O R D E R(Oral)
By this OA applicant has claimed the following relief:
(i) give direction to the respondents to make the payment of Rs.39650/- as balance amount of interest;
(ii) award further interest over the said unpaid amount @ 18% per annum.
2. The brief facts as narrated by applicant are that he retired on 30.06.2003 but his gratuity and commutation was wrongly withheld even though no enquiry was pending against him. Being aggrieved, he filed OA 2004/2004 seeking a direction to the respondents to release his dues with 18% interest. It was at this stage that chargesheet dated 19.10.2004 was issued. Accordingly, OA was amended for challenging the said chargesheet.
3. Vide order dated 1.6.2006, this Tribunal quashed the charge-sheet and directed the respondents to disburse the retiral benefits of applicant with 10% simple interest after three months from the date of retirement till it is actually paid within two months.
4. Applicant was due to get Rs.2,80,247 after deducting Rs.14,232 on account of provisional pension paid to the applicant out of total Rs.2,94,479/- because Rs.1,53,450/- was to be paid as gratuity while Rs.1,41,029/- as commutation.
5. The amount of Rs.2,80,247 was paid to the applicant on 18.11.2006. Applicant was thus entitled to get Rs.87661 by way of interest on account of delay of 37 months and 18 days but respondents paid him only Rs.48011/- by way of interest on 6.7.2007. The amount of Rs.39650/- was still illegally withheld. Being aggrieved, respondents again filed OA No.1657/2007 which was disposed off on 18.9.2007 by directing the respondents to prepare and give calculation sheet to the applicant as to how interest amount of Rs.48011 has been calculated. In case amount comes to be more than Rs.48011, as calculated by applicant, the same should be paid or a reasoned order should be passed. After this, respondents issued letter dated 12.11.2007 informing the applicant that interest has been paid only on the gratuity amount @ 10% simple interest w.e.f. 1.10.2003 till 17.11.2006.
6. It is in these circumstances, applicant has approached this Court the 3rd time on the ground that once direction was given by this Tribunal to grant him interest on retiral benefits, it could not have been denied on commutation of pension.
7. Respondents on the other hand have, simply stated that no interest is payable on pension as per Rule 69 of CCS (Pension) Rules.
8. I have heard both the counsel and perused the pleadings. It is to be borne in mind that this case is not coming up for the Ist time for adjudication as to whether applicant is entitled for interest on commutation of pension or not. In fact while deciding the Ist OA itself, this Tribunal had directed the respondents to disburse his unpaid retiral benefits with simple interest of 10% p.m. after three months from the date of retirement till it is actually paid. He had filed the above OA because his gratuity and commutation of pension were withheld therefore once the direction was given to disburse all the unpaid retiral benefits with interest, applicant cannot now state that interest is not payable on commutation of pension nor can I take a different view as that would amount to sitting in appeal over an order passed by coordinate bench, which is not permissible. If they were aggrieved with the order dated 1.6.2006, they should have challenged it before Honble High Court. Admittedly, order dated 1.6.2006 passed in OA 2004/2004 was not challenged by respondents but they had accepted it, therefore respondents were under an obligation to honour the directions of the Court.
9. In these circumstances, respondents cannot be heard of saying that interest is not payable on commutation of pension, therefore, this OA is partly allowed. Respondents are directed to release the interest on commutation of pension also as already directed at simple interest of 10% p.m. after three months from the date of retirement till it was paid to the applicant. This amount should now be paid to the applicant within 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, this order shall not be treated as a precedent in future cases. Applicant would not be entitled to any interest on interest but since applicant has been dragged to Court unnecessarily by the respondents, he would be entitled to a cost of Rs.2000/- to be paid within the above said period.
(Mrs. Meera Chhibber) Member (J) Rakesh