Ram Kumar v. Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi

By this OA applicant has sought the following relief:- i) that the respondents be directed to release the gratuity of the applicant with penal interest treating the date of retirement and date of birth of the applicant as 30.4.2005 & 17.4.1945 respectively instead of 31.5.2004 & 5.5.1944 as per corrigendum No.17 (77)/71-DSW/ESTT/19743 dated 6.7.2006 (Annexure A).

(ii) that the respondents be directed to release the amount of commutation of pension with delayed interest.

(iii) that the respondents be directed to pay the penal interest on delayed payment of pension and leave encashment.

(iv) that the respondents be directed to provide to the applicant statement of dues and payments.

2. It is submitted by the applicant that after leaving Indian Army, he was selected as Caretaker and joined respondent No.2 on 6.5.1971 from the category of Ex-serviceman. The applicant was relieved from his duties on 31.5.2005 on attaining the age of superannuation. After superannuation, an Office Order No.17 (77)/71-DSW/ESTT/24048-53 dated 8.8.2005 was issued by respondent No.2 wherein date of retirement and date of birth of the applicant was stated as 31.5.2004 and 5.5.1944. The applicant made a representation dated 9.9.2005 for correction of date of retirement and date of birth, but the same was rejected vide Memorandum No.17 (77)/71-DSW/ESTT/31753 dated 6.10.2005.

3. Applicant again represented, whereupon respondents issued Corrigendum dated 6.7.2006 (page 11) in modification of their earlier order dated 8.8.2005 clarifying therein that the date of retirement and the date of birth in respect of Shri Ram Kanwar, Caretaker may be read as 30.4.2005 and 17.4.1945 instead of 31.5.2004 and 5.5.1944 respectively. This Corrigendum was issued on 6.7.2006 but till date benefit of same has not been granted to the applicant.

4. Grievance of applicant in this case is that though he had worked up to 31.5.2005 but gratuity which was payable to him to the tune of Rs.1,19,510/- as per authority (annexed at page 18) has not been paid. The applicant has been paid only an amount of Rs.5389/ + Rs.1000. Rest of the gratuity has been adjusted against the salary which he had already received till the date of his retirement as 31.5.2005 by treating his date of retirement 31.5.2004. Moreover, other payments were also given to the applicant belatedly, which are as follows:- Head of Payment Amount Date of payment

(i) GPF Rs.93587/- 30.06.2005

(ii) Leave encashment Rs.72340/- 18.8.2007

(iii) Insurance Rs.8047/- 13.9.2007

(iv) Pension Rs.1,88,253/- 12.4.2008 (1.6.04 to 3/08).

5. It is submitted by the counsel for applicant that since these payments have been given after inordinate delay, he is entitled to interest on same. He is also entitled to the full gratuity along with interest in view of the Corrigendum.

6. Respondents have opposed this OA. They have stated applicants date of birth was recorded as 5.5.1944 in the service book as per the documents made available by applicant at the time of entry into Government service on 7.5.1971, therefore, his retirement was rightly treated to be with effect from 31.5.2004. Accordingly, out of total amount of gratuity amounting to Rs.1,19,510/-, a recovery of Rs.1,13,121/- was made and balance amount of Rs.5389/- was paid to the applicant. They have further stated that delay had taken place because of different date of birth found in different records.

7. As far as his Commutation of Pension is concerned, it can be done only after his medical examination. Information to this effect was already sent to the applicant vide letter dated 21.11.2007. They have thus stated applicant is not entitled to any interest.

8. I have heard both the counsel and perused the pleadings as well.

9. It is seen as far as Commutation of Pension is concerned, letter has been issued by Pay and Accounts Officer (PAO) on 21.11.2007 to the DDO stating therein that his pension can be computed only after his medical examination is done, therefore, let applicant get his medical examination done and give report to the respondents at the earliest, so that case of Commutation of Pension may be settled by the respondents within a reasonable period say 2 months thereafter.

10. As far as the controversy with regard to his date of birth is concerned, once respondents had issued the Corrigendum themselves on 6.7.2006 which is reproduced below, the controversy has been put to rest as respondents had themselves admitted his date of retirement should be 30.4.2005.:-  CORRIGENDUM In partial modification of this office order No.17 (77)/71-DSW/ESTT/24048-53 dated 8.8.2005 the date of retirement and date of birth in respect of Shri Ram Kanwar, Caretaker may be read 30.4.2005 & 17.4.1945 instead of 31.5.2004 & 5.5.1944 respectively. (Sanjay Gihar) Joint Director (Admn). No.F.17/77/71-DSW/ESTT/19743 Dated:6.7.2006. Since applicants date of retirement has been accepted as 30.4.2005, I see no reason why his full gratuity should not be paid to him and why deductions should still be made from his amount of gratuity. It is not the case of the respondents that applicant had not worked up to 30.4.2005. On the contrary applicant has come out with a specific case that he had actually worked up to 31.5.2005. He was paid the salary as he had worked till 31.5.2005. Respondents had earlier deducted the amount from applicants gratuity because they had treated the date of retirement of applicant as 31.5.2004. However, now that date of retirement has been declared as 30.4.2005 vide Corrigendum dated 6.7.2006, I would agree with the applicant, that he would become entitled to the full gratuity which was authorized vide order dated 3.8.2007 to the tune of Rs.1,19,510/-. Admittedly applicant has been paid only Rs.5389/- plus Rs.1000/-, therefore, respondents are directed to release the balance amount of gratuity of the applicant within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with interest at the rate mentioned under Rule 68 of CCS (Pension) Rules. The interest would be payable with effect from 6.10.2006 by giving 3 months time to the respondents after they had issued Corrigendum on 6.7.2006 till it is actually paid to the applicant.

11. As far as other amounts are concerned, GPF was paid to the applicant on 30.6.2005, i.e. within one month of his date of relieving, therefore, no interest is payable on this amount. There is some delay in payment of Leave Encashment and Insurance, but it has already been clarified by the Department of Personnel and Training in their note dated 2.8.1999 that there is no provision under CCS (Leave) Rules for payment of interest or for fixing responsibility. Moreover, encashment of leave is a benefit granted under the leave rules and cannot be termed as retrial benefits, therefore, interest is not payable under this head. Similarly in the case of Insurance it has been held by the Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance in their U.O. No. 709/E.V/99, dated 6.8.1999 that payments under CGEGIS cannot be termed as terminal benefit. As payments under this Scheme are made in accordance with the Table of Benefit which takes into account interest up to the date of cessation of service, no interest is payable on account of delayed payments under the Scheme, therefore, no interest would be payable on account of Insurance also.

12. As far as arrears of pension are concerned, it is admitted by the respondents that arrears of pension with effect from 1.6.2004 to March, 2008 have been paid to the applicant only on 12.4.2008. Respondents have not explained why at least provisional pension was not granted to the applicant after his retirement when it is specifically made clear in CCS (Pension) Rules that even if there is some Departmental Enquiry or Criminal Case pending against an employee, at least provisional pension must be released to the employee. Apart from saying that there was some problem with regard to the date of retirement of the applicant in their records, the respondents have not given any other explanation as to why provisional pension was not paid. It is now too well settled that pension is not a bounty and it has to be given to the employee immediately after his retirement, therefore, I feel ends of justice would be met if applicant is allowed interest on the arrears of Pension at the rate of 8% with effect from June, 2005 till 12.4.2008, i.e. the date when the arrears were actually paid to the applicant.

13. As far as Commutation of Pension is concerned, since respondents have already written a letter and applicant is required to get his medical examination done, therefore, let his medical examination be got done so that his case for Commutation of Pension be also processed within a period of 2 months from the date his medical examination is done.

14. With the above directions, this OA is partly allowed. No order as to costs. (Mrs. Meera Chhibber) Member (J) Rakesh