Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack
Swapneswar Gochhi vs D/O Forest And Environment on 14 March, 2023
1 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
O.A.No. 260/00556 of 2020
Reserved on 01.03.2023 Pronounced on 14.03.2023
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. SWARUP KUMAR MISHRA, MEMBER (J)
Swapneswar Gochhi, aged about 71 years, S/o. Late
Bhramarbar Gochhi, Retired IFS, Resident of S-97, Maitri
Vihar, Chandrasekharpur, P.S. Chandrasekharpur,
Bhubaneswar, Pin- 751023, Dist. Khurda.
..... Applicant
For the Applicant : M/s. R.N.Nayak, Counsel
-Versus-
1) State of Odisha, represented through the Addl. Chief
Secretary to Govt., Forest and Environment Department,
AT- Lok Seva Bhawan, Bhubaneswar-751001;
2) Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Odisha, At-
Aranya Bhawan, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar-
751423:
3) Principal Accountant General (A&E), Odisha,
Bhubaneswar- 751001, District- Khurda.
..... Respondents
For the Respondents: Mr. G.R.Verma, Counsel for UOI
Mr. J.Pal, Counsel for State of Odisha
2 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020
ORDER
Swarup Kumar Mishra, Member (J):
Applicant, a septuagenarian, had joined the Orissa Forest Service Cadre as Assistant Conservator of Forests on 06.03.1974. In course of service, he was promoted to the rank of Dy. Conservator of Forest and, subsequently, he was promoted to IAS in the year 1992 and continued as such till his voluntary retirement on 30.09.2005. Since his retiral dues were not paid in spite of his repeated request, he had filed OA No. 566/2006, which was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 31.10.2008 (A/1) with direction to the respondents to release his dues, along with interest, as per Rules, within a period of 60 days of receipt of copy of the order. The leave applications of the applicant, which were pending before Respondent No.1, were sanctioned only in the year 2009 (A/2). After a long lapse of 7 years of the order passed by this Tribunal and after 10 years of his retirement, respondent No.3 released the pension vide order dated 06.08.2015 (A/3) while withholding Gratuity amounting to Rs. 3,50,000/-. OA No. 867/2015, subsequently filed by the applicant, for further retiral benefits was allowed to be withdrawn by this Tribunal giving liberty to file a proper representation. Applicant preferred representation on 22.01.2016. CP No. 22/2016 filed by the 3 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020 applicant, for non-consideration of his said representation as per the order of this Tribunal in OA No. 867/2015, was dropped as per the submission of Ld. Counsel for the respondents in absence of applicant's advocate. Applicant filed MA No. 604/2017, which was disposed of vide order dated 12.12.2018 (A/8) with direction to the respondents to consider release of the dues in favour of the applicant within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of the order and also to consider for grant of interest if any, as per law, within stipulated period. Since nothing was communicated to the applicant thereafter, he filed MA 569/2019 (in OA No. 867/2015), which was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 16.10.2020 as under:
"7. In view of the discussions above, since the OA No. 867/15 was withdrawn by the applicant vide order dated 8.1.2016 and the respondent no. 1 has passed the order dated 8.9.2016 (Annexure-R-1/1) in compliance of the order dated 8.1.2016, no specific direction can be given regarding payment of interest as prayed for in this MA, unless the order dated 8.9.2016 is challenged as per the provisions of law. Taking into account the fact that the applicant has retired since long and he has received his retirement benefits after a long delay we dispose of this MA No. 569/2019 with observation that the case of the applicant for interest deserves fresh consideration and hence, the Respondents are to reconsider the same taking into account the provisions of the rules as applicable and observations of this Tribunal in earlier OAs filed by the applicant and pass a fresh order within six weeks' time, failing which the applicant will have the liberty to take 4 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020 appropriate action as per law to challenge the order dated 8.9.2016 passed by the respondents.
It is submitted by Ld. Counsel for the applicant that as per the provision in CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and the settled proposition of law by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of O.P.Gupta Vs. UOI, S.C.-
2012 (4) SCC 328, applicant is entitled to 12% interest on delayed payment of arrear pension, leave salary and the Gratuity. Accordingly, he has filed the instant OA with the following reliefs:
"(i) To release 12% interest on the gratuity amount of Rs. 3,50,000/- for the delayed period within a stipulated time.
(ii) To release 12% interest on arrear pension of Rs.
7,99,692/- for the period from 01.10.2005 to 22.09.2015 within a stipulated time.
(iii) To release 12% interest on arrear leave salary of Rs. 1,50,936/- for the period from 01.10.2005 to 31.01.2009 within a stipulated time."
2. Respondent No.3, Pr. Accountant General (A&E), Odisha has filed counter objecting to the relief claimed by the applicant. It is submitted that the applicant retired voluntarily w.e.f. 29.09.2005. The Addl. Secretary to the Govt., Forest and Environment Department, Bhubaneswar vide letter No. 2323 dated 04.02.2013 submitted pension 5 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020 papers of the applicant and, on verification thereof, office of Resp. No.3 sought clarification from the pension sanctioning authority vide letter dated 20.02.2013. Addl. Secretary to Govt., Forest and Environment Department, Bhubaneswar vide letter dt. 26.06.2015 furnished the required information for authorization of pensionary benefits and, accordingly, office of respondent No.3 authorized the pension vide letter dated 06.08.2015 (R-3/1 series). Gratuity of Rs. 3,50,000/- was withheld for want of detailed recovery particulars of HBA/Interest from 1996-97 to 2005-2006. Office of Resp. No.3 vide letter dated 05.08.2015 followed by reminder dated 04.12.2015, had called for information from pension sanctioning authority for release of Gratuity an, on receipt of recovery particulars of HBA, Gratuity was released vide letter dated 09.03.2016 (R-3/2 series). Hence, it is submitted that interest on delayed payment of Pension and Gratuity is not attributable to the office of Respondent No.3. It is further submitted that as per para-2 of the procedure for disbursement of pensionary benefits circulated by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Pension & Pensioner Welfare) vide G.I.O.M. No. 38/64/98-P&PW(F) dated 05.10.1999 (R-3/3), no interest is payable on delayed payment pension/commuted value of pension. Further, in para 2(f) of the said 6 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020 O.M., it has been clarified that there is no provision under CCS (Leave) Rules for payment of interest on delayed payment of leave encashment. Accordingly, it is submitted that there being no delay on the part of the Respondent No.3, the OA should be dismissed.
3. Counter has also been filed by Respondent No.1, State of Odisha, inter alia stating that applicant had filed OA No. 566/2006 to regularize and update his service book and to finalize and for payment of all the retiral dues with 9% interest per annum. Pursuant to the order of this dated 31.10.2008 in the said OA No. 566/2006 to release his dues along with interest as per rules, respondents vide order dated 08.09.2016 (A/10 to the OA) explaining all the factual position regarding delay in sanction of the pension and pensionary benefits, complied with the order of this Tribunal. Pension was released vide order dated 06.08.2015 but the Gratuity amount was withheld as the applicant had not submitted No Due Certificate in respect of house building advance availed by him, at the time of submission of his pension paper for which it took some time to collect the recovery particulars of HBA and on receipt of information, Gratuity was paid to the applicant vide order dated 09.03.2016. It is submitted that the claim of the applicant for 12% interest on delayed payment of leave salary and arrear pension etc. is 7 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020 not admissible on the ground that he had not submitted his up-to-date service book/no due certificate at the time of submission of his pension papers for that it took time to regularize his service period from different station/fixation of pay in the IFS senior time scale/to draw his arrear salary of fixation of pay/issue of revised LPC/regularize his deputation period by the Pr. AG (A&E), Odisha, which was procedural delay. Accordingly, they have prayed for dismissal of the OA.
4. Applicant, by filing rejoinder, has objected to the submissions of the respondents inter alia stating that he retired voluntarily w.e.f. 30.9.2005 but his final pension was released after a long lapse of time on 06.08.2015, i.e. after about 10 years of his retirement, and his Gratuity was further delayed for release. The reason of delayed payment is purely attributable to the respondents. The order of this Tribunal dated 08.01.2016 in OA 867/2015 was never complied by the State respondents and the order dated 08.09.2016 was never communicated to him. It is submitted that the last payment of installment in respect of HBA availed by him was available in the LPC, which was enclosed to the pension papers and, therefore, the applicant is no way responsible to obtain the No Due Certificate and it was the responsibility of the authority, who forwarded the pension papers, to obtain No Due 8 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020 Certificate. If the DCRG amount is not paid within three months of retirement, appropriate interest has to be paid to employee concerned under the provision of Rule 19-A of All India Services (DCRG benefit) Rules, 1958. Further, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of O.P.Gupta Vs. UOI, S.C.-2012 (4) SCC 328, 12% interest is payable for the delayed payment of gratuity and other pensionary dues. Hence, the applicant has prayed for the relief as claimed in this OA.
5. Ld. Counsel for the parties were heard at length and records were perused.
6. No doubt, the applicant having retired as an IFS Officer is governed under CCS (Pension) Rules 1972, which specifically enshrines provisions for process of verification of service and other preparatory work to be undertaken before retirement of an employee. Rule 65 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 deals with regard to interest on delayed payment of gratuity, pension and family pension. When it is clearly established that the delay in payment was attributable to administrative reasons or lapses, interest shall be paid on arrears of pension or family pension or gratuity at the rate and in the manner as applicable to General Provident Fund amount in accordance with the instructions issued from time to time. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme 9 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020 Court in a series of judgments reported as R.P.Kapur vs. Union of India, 1999 (8) SCC 110; R.R. Bhanot vs. Union of India, 1994 (2) SCC 406; State of Kerala vs. N.Padmanabhan Nair, 1985 Vol. 1 SCC 429; O.P.Gupta vs. Union of India, 1987 (4) SCC 328 and Uma Agarwal vs. State of U.P., 1999 (3) SCC 438, that if there is any delay in grant of pension, the pensioner is entitled to interest on the pension paid with delay inasmuch as pension is not a bounty, which is granted by the Government. Payment of interest on delayed payment of gratuity is mandatory and not discretionary when such delay in the payment of gratuity was not due to the fault of the employee [H. Gangahanume Gowda v. Karnataka Agro Industries Corpn. Ltd., (2003) 3 SCC 40,].
7. Further, it has come to the notice that as against the order of this Tribunal in OA No. 590/2011 (Balaram Jena Vs. UOI & Ors.), the applicant approached before the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.(C) No. 12927/2012 and the Hon'ble High Court of Odisha, by placing reliance on the decision in the case of Dhruba Charan Panda Vs. State of Orissa, 1999 (II) OLR 433, vide order dated 22.04.2022 was pleased to direct payment of interest on the delayed payment of pensionary dues from the date it became due to him till the actual payment was made. In the instant case, clearly there is an inordinate delay in releasing the 10 O.A.Nos. 260/00556 of 2020 Pension, Gratuity and Leave Salary and for such long delay the applicant cannot be held responsible. In the present case, the onus was on the respondents to take appropriate action in due course to release pension and pensionary benefits to a retiree within the stipulated period. We have no hesitation to hold that the delay was occasioned due to the fault of the respondents in not timely processing the pension papers of the applicant.
8. In view of the discussions made and the law discussed above, it is held that the applicant is entitled to the interest at the rate applicable to the GPF deposits on the delayed payment of pension and leave salary from the date it became due till actual payment was made and the interest on the Gratuity after three months of moratorium period from the date of retirement till the amount is actually paid and the same shall be paid to the applicant within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9. O.A. is accordingly allowed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
(SWARUP KUMAR MISHRA) Member (Judicial) RK/PS