Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Om Prakash vs M/O Housing And Urban Poverty ... on 24 March, 2022
1
O.A. No.3660/2018
Item No.3
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. No.3660 /2018
Thursday, this the 24th day of March, 2022
Hon'ble Mr. R N Singh, Member (J)
Mr. Om Prakash,
Group 'A', Executive Engineer (civil),
CPWD, Min. Of Urban and Housing Affairs,
63 years.
...Applicant
(Applicant in person)
Versus
Union of India through its
1. The Secretary
Ministry of Urban & Housing Affairs,
C-Wing, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi - 110 001
2. Director General,
CPWD, Min. Of Urban and Housing affairs
A-Wing, Nirman Bhawan,
New Delhi - 110 001
...Respondents
(Mr. R K Sharma, Advocate)
O R D E R (ORAL)
In the present OA, filed under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:
(a)To direct the respondents to pay the interest accrued on gratuity i.e. Rs. 4,65,000/- for 2 years and 7 months, @ 18% p.a., as per calculation as below--2
O.A. No.3660/2018
Item No.3 10,00,000 (2*18/100+7/12*18/100)= Rs.4,65,000/-
(b) To direct the respondents to pay the interest accrued on commutation of pension i.e. Rs. 3,53,253/- for 2 years and 7 months @18% p.a., as per calculation as below-
7,59,683(2*18/100+7/12*18/100)= Rs.3,53,253/-
(c) To direct the respondent to pay Rs. 50,000/- as to the cost of litigation.
(d) Any other and future relief, which this applicant be found entitled to or t his Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper may also be awarded in favour of applicant and against the respondent.
2. After notice, the respondents have filed their reply and the applicant has filed rejoinder thereto.
3. The undisputed facts are that the applicant retired from the services of the respondents as Executive Engineer on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 31.12.2015. Prior to his retirement, the applicant was involved in a criminal case, registered vide FIR No. 153/03 dated 26.06.2003 at Parliament Street, Delhi Police. In the said FIR, the applicant was convicted, however, the appeal against the conviction was allowed by the learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge-03, Patiala House Courts in Criminal Appeal No. 80/14 vide a common order dated 01.11.2014 (Annexure A/2). Subsequently, the applicant was proceeded under Rule 4 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 vide a memorandum dated 10.08.2015 (Annexure A/1). The said 3 O.A. No.3660/2018 Item No.3 departmental proceedings culminated into exoneration of the applicant vide the Presidential order dated 21.02.2018 (Annexure A/3). The payments of service gratuity and commutation of pension were made by the respondents to the applicant vide their orders dated 23.07.2018 (Annexures A/4 & A/5) respectively. The applicant preferred a representation dated 06.08.2018 (Annexure A/6) requesting the respondents for interest on delayed payment of various retiral dues, referred to in the said representation.
4. Mr. R K Sharma, learned counsel for respondents submits that though in view of the relevant rules and instructions on the subject, the applicant is though entitled for payment of interest on certain retiral dues, however, he is not entitled for the same on payment of commutation of pension. The respondents in paragraph 8 of their reply have furnished a calculation of Rs.2,55,500/- as interest payable to them. However, the same calculation appears to be in contradiction of their own averments made in paragraph 8 itself, inasmuch as the respondents, while quoting paragraph 3 of the Government of India decision No.1 under Rule 68 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, have stated that the rate of interest payable is equal to GPF + 2% (compound interest), whereas, in the same paragraph, they have asserted the calculation of GPF + 2% (simple interest). To 4 O.A. No.3660/2018 Item No.3 this, the applicant submits that the said amount, i.e., 2,55,500/- as calculated by the respondents, has also not been paid to him till date. The learned counsel for respondents submits that he is not aware as to whether the payment of such amount has been made to the applicant or not.
5. It is also not in dispute that the respondents have not passed any order pursuant to the representation of the applicant dated 06.08.2018 (Annexure A/6). The applicant, who appears in person, submits that he is entitled for interest on all the payments, which were made to him subsequent to his retirement. In this regard, he places reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Nand Lal Singh (W.P. (C) No.5505/2012) decided on 04.09.2012 and judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vijay L Mehrotra v. State of Uttar Pradesh, LAWS (SC) - 2000-1-36.
6. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties at length and perused the records.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present O.A. is disposed of with the following directions to the respondents:-
5O.A. No.3660/2018
Item No.3
(i) To release the payment of Rs.2,55,500/- as calculated by them in their reply, if not already released.
(ii) To consider the applicant's aforesaid representation dated 06.08.2018 and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order.
(iii) The respondents shall supply a copy of due and drawn statement with regard to the payment of retiral dues and interest thereon to the applicant.
(iv) The aforesaid exercise shall be completed by the respondents as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six weeks of receipt of a copy of this order.
There shall be no order as to costs.
( R N Singh ) Member (J) March 24, 2022 /sunil/kk/