Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1629 (CAL)

S. Jaladharan v. Union of India

2023-12-18

I.P.MUKERJI, SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)

body2023
JUDGMENT : 1. This writ application is arising out of non-payment of pensionary benefits to the writ petitioner. 2. By the order dated 24th November, 2023, the Central Administrative Tirbunal, Kolkata Bench, Circuit at Port Blair ordered as follows: “6. We have perused the material on record and, considering the submission of Learned Counsel for the applicant, we deem it fit to dispose of this OA, at admission stage, with a direction upon respondent no.4, i.e. Deputy Commissioner, South Andaman District, to settle the grievance of the applicant with respect to grant of pensionary benefits to him, in not later than 30 days from today.” 3. The Administration did not carry out the order. Instead it issued an office order being Order No.623 dated 30th November, 2023 to the following effect. “Whereas Shri S. Jaladharan, Tehsildar (Retired) is placed on superannuation pension list w.e.f 3.05.2023 (AN) vide this office Order No.628 dated 29/1/2022 on attending the age of superannuation pension being his date of birth is 25.05.1963 as recorded in Service Book. AND THEREFORE, in terms of the provision contained under Rule 62 of CCS Pension Rules, 2021, the Provision Pension is hereby sanctioned for a period of six months w.e.f 01.06.2023 to Shri S Jaladharan, Tehsildar (Retired) for Rs.33000/-per month plus dearness allowances and fixed medical allowance.” 4. The Administration did not challenge the order of the tribunal. The office order dated 30th November, 2023 is most inconsistent with the order of the tribunal. 5. The justification sought to be made by the Administration is this: 6. A complaint had been lodged against the petitioner on 8th February, 2021. This complaint was enquired into. The petitioner retired from service after 31st May, 2023. On 31st May, 2023 itself the enquiry report was furnished exonerating him. 7. Thus, at the time of retirement of the petitioner, no proceedings were pending against him. In spite of exoneration, on the pretext that the vigilance clearance report was not available, his pension was held up. 8. At the time of retirement and thereafter there was no allegation of misappropriation or defalcation of fund against the writ petitioner. On the contrary, the enquiry which the Administration initiated against him resulted in an enquiry report dated 31st May, 2023 absolving him of the charge or allegation made against him. 8. At the time of retirement and thereafter there was no allegation of misappropriation or defalcation of fund against the writ petitioner. On the contrary, the enquiry which the Administration initiated against him resulted in an enquiry report dated 31st May, 2023 absolving him of the charge or allegation made against him. On the existing facts the vigilance department of the Administration shall file a report stating that there is no case against the petitioner, within four weeks from date. Pension, in terms of the said order of the tribunal has to be released to the writ petitioner within two months from date irrespective of furnishing of the vigilance report. 9. Leave is granted to the petitioner to take out a separate proceeding for interest on pension and other retiral benefits if the said right is vested in him. 10. The original records be returned to learned counsel for the respondent. 11. The writ application is accordingly disposed of.