Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sonal Jain vs Naresh Kumar Chief Secretary & Ors Govt. ... on 19 December, 2023
1
C.P. No.278/2023
Item No. 22 (C-3)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
C.P. No. 278/2023
In
O.A. No. 2792/2018
This the 19th Day of December, 2023
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A)
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Sonal Jain
Aged About 62 Years
W/O Shri Sanjay Jain
Retired As Tgt (Math)
R/O H.No. 201, Dayanand Vihar,
Karkardooma, Delhi-110092
....Petitioner
(By Advocate : Mr. Anmol Pandita)
VERSUS
1. Sh. Naresh Kumar (Chief Secretary)
Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi
Delhi Secretariat,
New Delhi.
2. Sh. Himanshu Gupta (The Director)
Directorate Of Education
Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi Old Secretariat,
Civil Lines, Delhi-110054.
3. Dr. P. K Tyagi (The Deputy Director Secretary),
Directorate Of Education
Distt. East, D-Block,
Anand Vihar,New Delhi.
4. Sh. Raghubeer Singh,
The Head Of School,
Govt. Co.Ed. Sr Sec School,
Shiv Puri, Delhi 110051
.... Respondents
(By Advocate : Mr. H A Khan)
2
C.P. No.278/2023
Item No. 22 (C-3)
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Member (A) The present Contempt Petition has alleged willful disobedience of order dated 18.10.2022 in OA 2792/2018.
While disposing of the said OA, this Tribunal had given the following specific direction:
"7. In view of the foregoing, this Tribunal is of the view that there is merit in the case of the applicant and the OA is liable to be allowed. Hence the same is allowed with a direction to the respondents to pay all the pensionary benefits sought in this OA, to the applicant and for delayed payment, excluding three months time, the respondents are further directed to pay interest @ of 6% till the date of payment.
8. This exercise shall be completed by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order."
2. The respondents have filed an affidavit of compliance dated 20.09.2023 submitting therein that the payment as per the entitlement of the applicant with respect to her retiral dues has been fully made in her favour. They have annexed the relevant documents in support of this contention. 3 C.P. No.278/2023 Item No. 22 (C-3) These documents contain a chart giving such details in tabular form as well as the extracts from the service book of the petitioner.
3. Shri Girish Kumar Sharma, OSD, Litigation in Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi is present in court to assist us in this matter he submits that interest on delayed payment of gratuity has been paid to the applicant in terms of the relevant rules and further clarifies that rules do not provide for payment of interest as far as pension is concerned.
4. Shri Anmol Pandita, learned counsel for the petitioner confirms that the pensionary benefits stand extended to the applicant in terms of her entitlement. However, in terms of the directions of the Tribunal, the respondents were obliged to pay interest at the rate of 6 per cent on all the delayed payments and not merely gratuity. He contests that the instructions of DoPT cannot over-ride judicial pronouncements and hence, contempt continues. 4 C.P. No.278/2023 Item No. 22 (C-3)
5. He submits that payment of interest was directed by the Tribunal against the specific background which has been reflected in para 6 of the judgment which also quotes from the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that pension is a right and not a bounty.
6. While we appreciate the argument put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are acutely conscious of the limits of our jurisdiction in a contempt proceeding. To attract the provisions of Contempt of Court Act, an element of "willful disobedience" should be clearly demonstrated. The respondents have settled the entire claim of the petitioner in accordance with rules and have settled the issue of payment of interest also in accordance with rules by allowing the same on the delayed amount of gratuity.
7. Even our direction merely says "pay interest till the date of payment" and does not 5 C.P. No.278/2023 Item No. 22 (C-3) specify on what particular category payment the interest shall be paid.
8. We have no hesitation in holding that the respondents cannot be held guilty of willful disobedience. There is substantial compliance of the direction of this Tribunal and hence the Contempt Petition is closed.
9. However, if the petitioner still nurses some grievance, she is at liberty to take recourse to an appropriate remedy in accordance with law.
10. Notices are discharged.
(Manish Garg) (Tarun Shridhar)
Member (J) Member (A)
/RUDRA/