Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
Sharada R S vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd on 11 November, 2022
1 OA No.382/2020
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00
NO.170/00382/2020
FRIDAY, DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S SUJATHA ...MEMBER(J)
HON'BLE MR.RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ...MEMBER(A)
Smt. Sharada R.S.,
Aged 57 years,
W/o Sri Chandrashekar T.,
Junior Telecom Officer,
Leased CCTs,
O/o AGM Internal,
BSNL Centre, MAX-I
MAX Building,
PB Road,
Davangere: 577 002.
(Voluntarily retired under BSNL VRS 2019)
Residing at No.1394,
Opp. CMC Park Gate Road,
Near SC/ST Hostel,
Hostel
Saraswathi Nagar,
Davangere: 577 004,
Mobile No.9449855537. .... Applicant
(ByAdvocate
ByAdvocate Shri P.A.Kulkarni )
Vs.
2 OA No.382/2020
1. The Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,
By its Chairman and Managing Director,
Corporate Office (Personnel-II
(Personnel Section)
Bharat Sanchar Bhavan,
4th Floor, Janpath,
New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Director Vigilance,
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited,
Corporate Office,
Bharat Sanchar Bhavan,
4th Floor, Janpath,
New Delhi - 110 001.
3. The Chief General Manager Telecom,
Karnataka Circle,
No.1, Swamy Vivekananda Road,
Halasuru, Bengaluru - 560 008.
4. The General Manager Telecom,
Chitradurga Telecom District,
Devaraj Urs Layout,
Davangere - 577 006.
5. The Controller of Communication Accounts,
Karnataka 1st Floor, Amenity Block,
CMX Compound,
Palace Road, Bengaluru - 560 001. ...Respondents
(By Advocate Shri Vishnu Bhat for Respondent No.1to 4 and
Shri S. Sugumaran for Respondent No.5)
No.5
3 OA No.382/2020
O R D E R (ORAL
ORAL)
Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)
The applicant has sought for declaration that conditions no. (i),
(ii) and (iii) under the Note att attached to order No.VRS2019/2200/A 0000000033, dated 30.01.2020 (Annexure A2) No.VRS2019/2200/A/0000000033, passed by the Chief General Manager, Telecom, Karnataka Circle, Bengaluru are in conflict with the conditions laid down for taking voluntary retirement under the BSNL Voluntary Retirement Scheme Scheme, 2019 ('Scheme' for short) notified by BSNL and as such those conditions are unenforceable unenforceable against the applicant inter alia challenging the order order bearing No.VRS2019/2200/A/0000000033 dated 30.01.2020 (Annexure A2) passed by the Chief General Manager Telecom, Karnataka Circle, Bengaluru, Respondent No.3 herein, so far as it pertains to:
(i) Permitting the applicant to retire on provisional basis.
(ii) The conditions (i) to (iii) under the Note.
Further the applicant has sought for a direction to the respondents to cause forthwith issue of final order of retirement and to release monetary benefits due to the applicant in terms of the Scheme, notified 4 OA No.382/2020 by BSNL SNL under No.1-15/2019-PAT No.1 PAT (BSNL) dated 04.11.2019 along with interest.
2. The applicant while working as Junior Telecom Officer (JTO), Davangere Unit of Karnataka Telecom Circle submitted her option for voluntary retirement in terms of the Scheme notifi notified by BSNL Corporate Office No.1-15/2019-PAT No.1 PAT (BSNL) dated 04.011.2019. In terms of her option tendered, the competent authority, the Chief General Manager, Telecom Circle, Bengaluru (Respondent No.3) was pleased to accept her option and permit the ap applicant to retire from service in terms of the VR Scheme with eeffect from 30.01.2020 afternoon, however, owever, with a note, note which reads thus:
"Note: (i) In respect of Smt. Sharada R.S. (PER.nr (PER.nr-98503465) the community certificate verification is pending before the State Level Scrutiny Committee (SLSC), Smt.Sharada R.S. (PER.NR-98503465) (PER.NR 98503465) is permitted to retire provisionally.
(ii) The employee shall be paid provisional pension. The other retirement benefits viz., DCRG, Commuted value of pension and Ex Ex-gratia and leave encashment shall be withheld till the outcome of community certificate verification by State level Scrutiny Committee as per the existing procedure.
(iii) If any adverse verification report is received after retirement of such employees under BSNL VRS VRS 2019, suitable action/disciplinary action shall be initiated according to the relevant rules/regulations."5 OA No.382/2020
3. As on the date of submitting the voluntary retirement option, the applicant was neither facing departmental proceedings nor judicial proceedings. Being ing aggrieved by the grant of provisional pension instead of issue of final order/retirement/release order order, with a note attached to the order dated 30.01.2020 passed by the competent authority, Respondent No.3, No.3 is questioning the legality and correctness of these conditions laid down in the VRS order (Annexure A2).
4. The learned Counsel Shri P.A.Kulkarni appe appearing for the applicant submitted that the authority doubting about the applicant's caste status what existed exist at the time of the retirement insisted for production of the latest caste certificate for settlement of monetary benefits under the voluntary scheme.
scheme. In case there was any suspicion about the applicant's caste status, at the time of initial appointment in the year 1985, on the basis of caste certificate dated 27.01.1983 27.01.1983, proceedings would have been initiated for holding a regular inquiry after levelling a definite and precise allegations and after levelling the charge against the applicant. Such Such action not been taken taken, denying the retirement benefits in full to the applicant is wholly illegal and contrary to principles of law. The learned Counsel sel further submitted that no community certificate verification was pending before the State Level 6 OA No.382/2020 Scrutiny Committee in respect of the applicant which is the basis for issuance of the order for acceptance of voluntary retirement under Voluntary Retirement Scheme subject to conditions impugned herein herein.
All along the applicant's case was that her community has been Scheduled Tribe under the Central list. The dispute whether the caste of 'Maleru' or 'Maaleru' comes under the Scheduled cheduled Tribe or nnot vis-à-
vis the genuineness of the caste certificate was not the issue considered by the respondents from the date of appointment of the applicant. The entire approach of the respondents in permitting the applicant to retire provisionally and withholding withholding the retirement benefits viz., DCRG, commuted value of pension , ex-gratia ex gratia and leave encashment till the outcome of the non-existing community certificate verification by State level Scrutiny Committee, Committee is wholly misconceived.
5. The learned Counsel Shri Shri Vishnu Bhat representing the respondents justifying the impugned order submitted that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of the very applicant in W.P. No.16328/2007 (DD 10.07.2009) has observed that the inconsistent claims aims of the applicant and Respondent No.2&3 would insist to enquire whether or not the applicant belongs to 'Maleru' or 'Maaleru' community, but the same shall be kept in abeyance pending judgment 7 OA No.382/2020 of the Hon'ble Apex Court in W.P. (Civil) No.76/2003 filed under Article 32 of Constitution of India by Sri ri A.S.Nagendra and four others who were affected by the Government order dated 11.03.2002, in as much as the benefit of Scheduled Tribe status aavailable to 'Maleru' community extended to 'Maaleru' community is concerned. The said issue being pending, the applicant is not entitled to any relief claimed in the application.
6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
7. The main ground for accepting the application of the applicant under voluntary retirement scheme and provisionally withholding the retirement benefits viz., DCRG, commuted value of pension, ex ex-gratia and leave encashment till the outcome of the community ccertificate verification, is due to the pendency of community certificate verification before the State Level Scrutiny Committee (SLSC). According to the applicant no such issue is pending before the SLSC . We have provided ample opportunity to the lea learned Counsel for the respondents ondents to place on record the particulars of the pendency of the community certificate verification before SLSC, but the respondents have failed to place the same on record.
record. The main ground for issuing 8 OA No.382/2020 Annexure A2 permitting the applicant to retire provisionally, being the pendency of the matter before SLSC, it was obligatory on the part of the respondents to specify the particulars particulars of the same. Neither in the said Annexure A2 nor in the reply/argument reply/arguments, the particulars have been een given by the respondents in this regard. Retirement benefits being ing the property of an employee, who is legally entitled to for the services rendered, rendered such benefits cannot be withheld merely on suspicion or doubt regarding the caste verification. P Permitting the applicant to retire provisionally on some frivolous grounds not supported by material evidence is wholly obnoxious obnoxious. If really such community caste verification was pending before the SLSC, the status report would have been made available in the present proceedings by the respondents. In the absence of such exercise, we are of the considered opinion that the entire approach of the respondents in permitting the applicant to take retirement under the scheme provisionally is unjustifiable.
8. We have made an effort to find out the status of Writ Petition (Civil) No.76/2003 filed under Article 32 of Constitution of India before the Hon'ble Apex Court at the instance of Sri A.S.Nagendra and four others, referred to in the order of the Hon'ble Hi High Court of 9 OA No.382/2020 Karnataka dated 10.07.2009 in W.P.No.16328/2007 W.P.No.16328/2007. From the website, it was noticed that the said matter was dismissed as withdrawn by the petitioners on 18.04.2013. In such circumstances, the respondents at this stage cannot place reliance on th the order dated 10.07.2009 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka Karnataka, when the referred W.P.(Civil) No.76/2003 has already been disposed of on 18.04.2013.
9. As per Clause 7(ii) of the Scheme, grant of provisional pension under Rule 69 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 972 would arise only under the following circumstances:
"7(ii) The VRS option of employee(s) facing Departmental/Judicial proceedings shall be accepted and Earned Leave encashment, Transfer grant, GPF/CPF and pension will be released sed provisionally as per Rule 69 of CCS Pension Rules, 1972"
Admittedly, no departmental/judicial proceedings were pending against the applicant while considering the option for voluntary retirement under the Scheme. As such authorities are not justified in releasing the pension of the applicant on provisional basis, insisting for production of the latest caste certificate for settlement of the monetary benefits benefits. In the absence of material particulars, the action taken bby the respondents is 10 OA No.382/2020 against the scheme and accordingly Annexure A2 deserves to be set aside.
10. In the result, the respondents are directed to issue final order of retirement and to release monetary benefits due to the applicant in terms of BSNL Voluntary Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2019 notified by BSNL R-11 under No.1-15/2019-PAT No.1 PAT (BSNL), dated 04.11.2019 (Annexure A1) along with GPF rate of interest till the date of payment.
11. The compliance of this order shall be made by the respondents in an expedite manner, manner, in any event not later than 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No order as to costs.
(RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA) (JUSTICE S.SUJATHA)
MEMBER(A) MEMBER(J)
sd.
11 OA No.382/2020