Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Mohinder Pal Singh Ahluwalia Son Of Sh. ... vs The Union Of India on 30 October, 2013
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
OA. 204/PB/2013
(Reserved on 23.10.2013)
Chandigarh, this the 30th day of October, 2013
Mohinder Pal Singh Ahluwalia son of Sh. Bhupinder Singh Ahluwalia, resident of 109, Rail Vihar, P.O. Chugitti, Jalandhar City (Pb.)
APPLICANT
BY ADVOCATE: MR. SUDESH SAHI PROXY COUNSEL FOR
MR. ARVIND KASHYAP
VERSUS
1.The Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Railway, New Delhi.
2.The Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi through General Manager.
3.Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer (Admn.), The Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi.
4.Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer (Construction), the Northern Railway, Kashmiri Gate, New Delhi.
5.Deputy Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts Officer (Construction), Northern Railway, Jammu Tawi (J&K).
RESPONDENTS
BY ADVOCATE: MR. G.S. SATHI
ORDER
HONBLE MRS. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER(A):-
1. This OA has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief:-
The applicant is seeking direction to the letter dated 27.9.2011 and 25.11.2011 to the extent whereby the respondents have held that the service of the applicant has been rightly calculated as described in reply to OA No. 77/PB/2012 and further directions to the respondents to release all the pensionary benefits in accordance with law.
2. Averment has been made in the OA that the applicant joined the respondent department on 7.3.1980 as Accounts Assistant and on 1.12.2004, he was promoted as Stock Verifier and was transferred to Jammu Tawi where he joined. In May, 2006, the applicant was diagnosed as suffering from Diabetic Neuropathy and was getting treatment from various doctors as well as PGI, Chandigarh and was admitted for treatment in the hospital from time to time. The applicant was even issued a charge sheet on the alleged ground of being an absconder. Since the applicant felt that he would not get cured of his disease, he moved an application for voluntary retirement, but the same was not processed. Finally, in December, 2010, he filed OA. 1048/PB/2010 seeking directions to the respondents to consider his notice seeking voluntary retirement and the OA was disposed of with such direction. Since the respondents still did not take any decision, the applicant filed CP No. 76/2011 and thereafter, the applicant was allowed voluntary retirement w.e.f. 25.5.2011. The applicant requested for release of his pensionary benefits, but the same were not released to him. Although the applicant was suffering from a disease that required regular medical care, the hospital authorities refused to treat him as no Identity Card had been issued to him as the same could only be issued after deposit of one months salary, but, without the release of the financial benefits, the applicant was not in a position to deposit this amount. The respondents did not issue the complimentary passes to the applicant and five increments due to him, were not counted while calculating his pension. The period of leave without pay and extraordinary leave availed by him was not counted as qualifying service for his pension and thus, he had been put to a considerable loss. The applicant then filed OA. 77/PB/2012 for release of the pensionary benefits and sought quashing of letter dated 25.11.2011 through which the respondents had informed him that the qualifying service had been rightly calculated. The respondents filed reply to OA. 77/PB/2012 and the applicant was allowed to withdraw this OA through order dated 5.9.2012 with liberty to file a fresh OA. Hence, the present OA. 204/PB/2013 has been filed.
3. In the grounds for relief, it has been stated as follows:-
(i) The service period for which the applicant remained on medical leave, has to be calculated towards the calculation of the total period of qualifying service and if this period is counted, the applicant would also be eligible for two complimentary passes.
(ii) The respondents had erred in fixing the pension of applicant after deducting five increments that were granted to the applicant in the year 2004 when he was sent for Construction Project at Jammu.
(iii) The respondents had intentionally delayed the matter by moving the pension papers from one office to another. He has applied for VRS in the year 2010 and the same was accepted on 25.5.2011, but there was considerable delay in making the payment of his retiral benefits and hence, he is entitled for interest on account of the delayed payment of pension.
4. In the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents, it has been stated that the applicant retired from service by virtue of acceptance of his request for voluntary retirement w.e.f. 25.5.2011. The applicant was required to submit requisite pension papers on prescribed proforma for sanction/payment of pensionary benefits but he did not apply for the same. Therefore, the answering respondents deputed its staff to contact the applicant at his residence to get the requisite papers signed from him. However, the applicant did not submit the complete documents which resulted in delay of the settlement of pensionary dues and thus the delay in sanction/release of pensionary benefits occurred due to inaction/lapse on the part of the applicant. Besides, the applicant had to apply for the pension in his own handwriting but he did not attend the office of Dy. FA&CAO/C/USBRL even once. The requisite papers were got signed from the applicant through special messenger and the same were forwarded to FA & CAO/C, Kashmiri Gate, Delhi on 28.7.2011. However, the case was returned by HQ Office for want of vigilance clearance. The vigilance clearance was obtained on 2.8.2011. Further, the applicant failed to submit the proof of age of his wife. The HQ office vide letter dated 27.9.2011 asked for the same and on receipt of certificate of date of birth of his wife, the pension case of the applicant was again submitted to FA & CAO/Pension/Baroda House vide office letter dated 25.10.2011. After scrutiny of the pension papers, the PPO No. 011010439 dated 1.12.2011 was issued by fixing the pension @ Rs. 9335 + DA. The commuted portion of the pension was determined at Rs. 3734/-.
5. It is further stated that the request of the applicant seeking VRS was accepted w.e.f. 25.5.2011. The applicant gave D.O.B. certificate of his wife on 13.10.2011. As such five months of delay was attributable to the applicant. The details of various payments made to the applicant are as under:
S.No. Detail of payments released Amount A.B. No. Mode of payment
1.
GIS Rs. 23,878 198-D Dt. 27.6.2011 Cheque
2. PF Rs. 5,88,617 50-P Dt. 14.7.2011 Cheque
3. Commutation of pension Rs. 3,67,157 9907109623 Dt. 28.11.2011 RTGS
4. DCRG Rs.3,38,300 9907109846 Dt. 31.1.2012 RTGS Since joining of RHLHS scheme is optional, the onus for completing the required formalities lay upon the applicant. As soon as the applicant fulfilled the required formalities, the medical facilities were made available to him.
6. As regards the allegations about qualifying service not being determined correctly by the respondents, the position has been explained as follows:-
Particulars Years Months Days Date of acceptance of voluntary retirement 2011 05 25 Date of joining 1980 03 7 Total service 31 02 18 LWP + EOL (1079 + 1459) = 2538 (-) 6 11 18 Total qualifying service 24 03 0 As regards fixation of amount of pension of the applicant is concerned, grant of five advance increments for working in USBRL project is given for motivating the staff to work in tough geographical areas. The applicant was also granted the same while working in this project. As per the policy letter, the grant of this incentive is to be withdrawn when the employee is transferred from the project and does not confer any perpetual right upon the employee for consideration of said five increments for determination of pensionary benefits. Furthermore, the applicant was absent from duty and for which he was issued charge sheet dated 21.8.2007 which culminated in punishment order dated 22.1.2011 which the applicant did not contest and as such, it is evident that the applicant had accepted his fault. The Construction Project, being of national importance, the other stock verifier had to be posted for getting the work done and the incentive was to be given to the employee who performed the designated job. The applicant was transferred to Sr. DFM/FZRs office vide SOO No. 90 back to the department. As such, the special incentives were not to be taken into consideration for determination of pensionary benefits.
7. About the complimentary passes, it is stated that the applicant did not indicate the office from where he intended to obtain his post-retirement passes. The applicant submitted an application dated 4.8.2011 for issue of complimentary pass and transfer of his pass account to Traffic Accounts Office Jallandhar. The applicant had qualifying service equal to 24 years and 3 months and therefore only one set of complimentary passes is due to him. The application of the applicant for issue of complementary passes had been forwarded to Sr. AFA/TA/JUC and the applicant was asked to obtain the same from that office. In view of this position, there has been no deliberate/inordinate delay in release of pensionary benefits nor there has been any discrepancy in determination of qualifying service as alleged by the applicant. As such, the OA is devoid of merits and the same deserves to be dismissed with cost.
8. Arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties were heard. Learned counsel for the applicant reiterated the facts and grounds taken in the OA and stressed that the qualifying service for pensionary purposes in respect of the applicant had been wrongly calculated as the period of leave without pay and extraordinary leave had not been counted as qualifying service although the applicant had availed this leave on medical grounds.
9. Learned counsel for the respondents drew attention to para 8 of the written statement filed and stated that this clarifies the position adequately and the applicant was not entitled to have any additional period counted as qualifying service. Besides, the applicant had not provided any document to support his claim that he availed the leave without pay and the extraordinary leave on medical grounds and hence, this period could not be counted for qualifying service
10. I have given careful thought to the pleadings of the parties and the material available on record. There is no merit in the plea of the applicant regarding delay in the release of pensionary benefits and non-counting of 5 increments given to him as incentive for working on the Construction Project. Since he reverted from the project, he could not get continuing benefit of this incentive.
11. Regarding the issue of qualifying service, it is seen that although some documents have been appended with the OA indicating that the applicant was undergoing treatment for Diabetic Neuropathy, but there is no document to establish that the applicant had applied for leave citing his medical condition and the same had been sanctioned on medical grounds. In the absence of such documentation, it is not possible to consider the claim of the applicant that the leave without pay and extraordinary leave was availed on medical grounds. In view of the factual matrix of the case and the position in the Rules, there is no option but to reject this OA. No costs.
(RAJWANT SANDHU)
MEMBER(A)
Dated: October 30th , 2013.
ND*