Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
Chandrappa S H vs Department Of Telecommunication on 16 February, 2026
1
O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/0027/2024
Order Reserved on:12.02.2026
Date of Order: 16.02.2026
CORAM:
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA, MEMBER (J)
Shri Chandrappa S.H
Age: 60 years, Occ:-Business
# 1696/58, 'A' Block,
Saraswathi Nagar,
Davangere 577 004 ......Applicant
(By Advocate: Shri.Keshavamurthy H.B)
Vs.
1. Union of India
Represented by Secretary
Department of Telecommunication,
Dak Bhavan,
New Delhi 110 001.
2. The General Manager Telecom,
Dharwad Telecom District,
Sanchar Sadan station road,
Hubli 580 020
3. The Controller of Communication Accounts,
Karnataka Circle, Amenity Block,
2nd Floor, Palace Road,
Bengaluru 560 001
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU
CAT BANGALORE
2026.02.18
Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30'
2
O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE
4. The Accounts Officer (TA)
O/o GMTD Hubli (BSNL),
BSNL Bhavan,
Hubli 580 020
5. The Assistant General Manager (NOW)
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
2nd Extl, Davangere 577002 .... Respondents
(By Senior Panel Counsel Shri S. Prakash Shetty for
Respondent Nos. 1 & 3, Senior Panel Counsel Shri K.
Gajendra Vasu for Respondent Nos. 2, 4 & 5)
ORDER
This Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 claiming the following reliefs:
"a) To quash, by issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order the impugned endorsement 12/562019066200816 date 11-01-2021 rd issued by the 3 Respondent (ANNEXURE - A9) as null and void with a further direction to settle the pensionary benefits of the Applicant's Wife including Commuted pension which is calculated at Rs 6,20,883/-
as per terminal benefits calculation sheet prepared by 2nd respondent along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum; and
b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or order or direction or any other appropriate writ directing the respondents to sanction Commuted pension to the applicant holding that with-holding of the same is illegal and order to pay the same with interest.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30' 3 O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE
c) Pass any other order/orders as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."
2. The facts in brief, as narrated by the applicant, are that his wife, Smt.Manjula.H who was working as Deputy Director in the second respondent's Department, took voluntary retirement from the services on 01.06.2019 due to illness. Accepting the voluntary retirement sought by the applicant's wife, she was relieved from her services on the afternoon of 01.06.2019. The applicant contends that his wife submitted, in the prescribed format, application (s) for claiming all the terminal benefits/claims, including commuted pension, on 15.06.2019. However, she died on 16.06.2019. Subsequently, the applicant requested the respondents to settle the commuted pension and cumulative value of pension, etc., of his late wife. There being no response to settle the commuted pension of his late wife, the applicant made a detailed representation before the National Pension Adalat for releasing the commuted pension dues of Rs.6,20,883/-. The said grievance was closed in terms of the impugned order dated 11.01.2021 referring to AGM (HR & Admn) Office of GMTD, Hubli Letter dated 09.12.2020, wherein it was decided by the competent sanctioning authority that commutation cannot be given in the SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30' 4 O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE applicant's case. Being aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this Original Application.
3. Learned counsel Shri.Keshavamurthy H.B representing the applicant, submitted that the impugned action of the respondents in not settling the commuted pension of his late wife is illegal. The reasons assigned by the competent authority to reject the claim of the applicant i.e., that the commutation application with the thumb impression is without witness and, as per the medical report of the date on which the thumb impression was made on the commutation form, the official was unconscious and bedridden, are imaginary. Once the thumb impression of the applicant's wife was accepted with respect to the release of other pensionary/retiral benefits of his wife, no objections could be raised regarding the very same thumb impression of the applicant's wife with respect to commuted pension. The respondents had given all the retiral benefits except the commuted pension. Denying the sanction of commutation to the applicant as the nominee, on flimsy grounds is wholly unsustainable. Hence, it is necessary for this Tribunal to interfere with the impugned order.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30' 5 O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE
4. Learned counsel Shri.K.Gajendra Vasu, representing the respondent nos.2, 4 and 5, has placed the original records before the Bench. A detailed reply statement has been filed on behalf of the said respondent nos.2, 4 and 5. Referring to the said reply statement, learned counsel submitted that the pension papers of the deceased official along with commutation forms, were received through her husband/applicant herein on 24.06.2019. The commutation form dated 15.06.2019 had the thumb impression of the deceased official and the same was not attested. The medical certificate dated 15.06.2019 issued by the Government Hospital (Annexure A-5) indicates that the deceased employee was unconscious and bedridden as on 15.06.2019 and, due to the diseases suffered by her, she is not able to put her signature. Pursuant to the receipt of the pension papers, except commutation of pension, the leave encashment of Rs.1,33,094/-, gratuity amount of Rs.12,20,027/- and family pension as admissible were settled and paid to the applicant. Being aggrieved by the non- sanctioning of the commutation of pension, the applicant approached pension adalat. Based on the decision taken by the competent authority after holding the meeting headed by the high-level officer that no commutation of pension could be recommended to the late official as the official has died before the submission of the SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30' 6 O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE commutation of application, thumb impression made on the commutation application form i.e., Form -1 A is not having witness signature, hence, is not a valid application and commutation is basically a form of loan after retirement for which applicant's voluntarily desire/willingness to take commutation as the pension will be reduced for the commuted value for fifteen years, was not established as the applicant was in unconscious state on the date of putting the thumb impression on commutation form. National pension adalat has rightly closed the case of the applicant. Thus, justifying the action of the competent authority and the pension adalat, learned counsel seeks for dismissal of the Original Application.
5. Learned counsel Shri.S Prakash Shetty, representing respondent Nos.1 and 3, supporting the arguments of the learned counsel for respondent Nos.2,4 and 5, submitted that the desire of the pensioner for commutation of pension along with the percentage of commutation was not established as required under Rule 5(2) of CCS (Commutation of Pension Rules) 1981. Hence, the Original Application is liable to be rejected.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the materials on record.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30' 7 O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE
7. It is not in dispute that pursuant to the pension papers of the deceased official along with the commutation form, received through the applicant (husband of the official), the respondents have granted all the benefits to the nominee of the deceased employee except the commuted pension.
8. From the original records, it is discerned that in the note sheet No.8, it has been recorded that at the meeting held in the chamber of DGM Davangere on 21.11.2020 it was decided that the commutation may not be recommended to the family pensioner of the official as (1) the official had died before the submission of the application form for commutation. (2) Thumb impression is made on the commutation form, but there is no witness for the same which may not be treated as valid and (3) Commutation is basically form of a loan after retirement for which the applicant has to voluntarily desire/willing to take the commutation as the pension will be reduced for the commuted value for 15 years, but the desire of the applicant is not known as the applicant was in unconscious state on the date of putting thumb impression on commutation form.
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30' 8 O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE
9. Form 1A - form of application for commutation, submitted through the applicant bears only the LTM of the deceased employee and is dated 15.06.2019.
10. The medical certificate issued by C.G District hospital Davangere dated 15.06.2019 (Annexure A5) reads thus:
" MEDICAL CERTIFICATE:
This is to certify that, Smt. H. Manjula W/o S.H. Chandrappa aged 57 years, Residence of #1696/58, Snehalaya, Saraswathi Nagar, Davangere-04.
After physical examination and document verification. she is suffering from Carcinoma Cervix - Post operative and chemotherophy status, Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, and Focal Seizures more than 5 years. At present patient is unconscious and bedridden. Due to above diseases she is not able to do her signature.
OPD No: 20190183947 Date: 15/06/2019 Place: Davangere."
11. Rule 5 (2) of the CCS (Commutation of pension) Rules, 1981 reads thus:
SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30' 9 O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE "5. Limit on commutation of pension -
(1) ...........
(2) In an application for commutation [in Form 5 of the Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 or in Form 1 or Form 1-A or Form 2 of these rules], as the case may be, an applicant shall indicate the [percentage] of pension which he desires to commute and may either indicate the maximum limit of [forty per cent] of pension or such lower limit as he may desire to commute."
In the light of the aforesaid Rule 5(2), the desire of the pensioner for commutation of pension along with the percentage of commutation is mandatory.
12. The medical certificate dated 15.06.2019 placed on record by the applicant categorically specifies that official, Smt.H. Manjula - applicant's wife, was suffering from various ailments due to which she was not able to put her signature and she was unconscious and bedridden at that time. The said medical certificate would indicate that the thumb impression of the pensioner was taken when she was unconscious and bedridden. As such, the desire of the pensioner for commutation of pension is lacking. Such a desire being sine-qua-non for commutation of pension, merely on the thumb impression of the pensioner in Form 1A, not being attested by any witnesses, no commuted pension could be released to the applicant. SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30' 10 O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE
13. Granting all other pensionary or retiral benefits of the applicant's wife - pensioner with the thumb impression of the official, stands on a different footing as pension/retiral benefits become the right of the pensioner or the nominees of the pensioner in case of a family pension. No such legal right could be denied by the respondents. But in the case of commutation of pension, it partakes the character of a loan after retirement, for which the desire of such pensioner/official is mandatory. If such an official/pensioner was in an unconscious state on 15.6.2019 while putting the thumb impression on Form 1 A, without any hesitation, it can be held that the same cannot be construed as compliance with Rule 5(2). Hence, the reasoning assigned by the committee headed by high-level officers and based on which, closing the grievance of the applicant by the National Pension Adalat cannot be faulted with.
14. The authenticity of the thumb impression could be established by the attestation signature of witnesses. In the absence of such attestation, and on the contrary, the medical certificate disclosing the unconscious state of the official on 15.06.2019 at the time of putting her signature in the commutation form, no exception can be found with the decision taken by the competent authority to reject the claim SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30' 11 O.A.No.170/27/2024/CAT/BANGALORE of commutation of pension by the applicant.
15. For the reasons aforesaid, the Original Application lacks merit. Accordingly, the Original Application stands dismissed.
Pending M.As, if any, stand disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
Sd/-
(JUSTICE S. SUJATHA) MEMBER (J) /sv/ SHAINESHAINEY VIJU CAT BANGALORE 2026.02.18 Y VIJU 12:49:06+05'30'