AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
Mr. Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, J.M.
The brief fact of the case as narrated by the applicant appearing in person is that he was working as Sr. Manager (Administration & Accounts) with the Central Tool Room & Training Centre, Bhubaneswar and was relieved from the post on superannuation w.e.f. 30.5.2020. But the respondents have not paid him the following dues :
DA balance 4% (17% to 21%) of the basic pay Rs.94,100
ii) PF deposit towards employer & employee contribution in the PF Account of the applicant.
iii) The incentive for the year 2019-20 as per CTTC Incentive Rules applicable for employees.
iv) Balance House Rent Allowance 16-8=8% for the month of February, March & April, 2020 applicable for Bhubaneswar city.
The applicant has submitted that while working as Sr. Manager (Administration & Accounts) he was issued transfer order dated 30.1.2020 by the then Managing Director when the applicant refused to sign the illegal bills. The applicant challenged the said transfer order in OA 55/2020 before this Tribunal and this Tribunal vide order dated 5.2.2020 ordered as follows:
“If no successor has joined in place of the applicant as against the post at Bhubaneswar from which he was relieved, then the said post be kept vacant and no coercive steps to be taken against the applicant till disposal and communication of order on the representation of the applicant has made for reconsideration of his transfer order.”
The applicant remained on leave and his leave applications were sanctioned and he was paid salary every month. This Tribunal vide order dated 28.5.2020 passed in MA 238/2020 directed the applicant to join on 30.5.2020 in CTTC, Bhubaneswar. The applicant joined on 30.5.2020 in CTTC, Bhubaneswar along with Medical Certificate issued by the Medical Officer, UPHC, Niladrivihar, Bhubaneswar and was relieved on the same date i.e. date of superannuation vide relieve order dated 30.5.2020. But he was paid 8% HRA applicable for Rayagada instead of 16% applicable for Bhubaneswar which is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory in the eyes of law. Hence the applicant has filed the present OA seeking the following reliefs :
Direct/order the Respondent No.1, 2 & 3 to dispose of the representations of the applicant as at Annexure A/VII and pass necessary orders within a stipulated period as may be prescribed by this Hon’ble Tribunal for the interest of justice;
ii) Pass such other order(s) or directions as may be deemed fit and proper in the bona fide interest of justice and benefit of the retired person like applicant who is deprived of getting superannuation benefits.
The respondents have filed counter stating that the applicant earlier filed OA 580/2021 with a prayer to dispose of the representation dated 4.10.2021 wherein he had claimed retiral benefits such as DA, deposit of PF amount, gratuity, leave encashment, incentives and house rent allowance. The said OA was initially disposed of on 23.12.2021 without issuing notice to the present respondents, with a direction to the present respondents to dispose of the representation dated 4.10.2021 within three months. The present respondents on receiving the copy of the order dated 23.12.2021 filed MA 30/2022 for recalling the order dated 23.12.2021. After hearing MA 30/2022, this Tribunal modified the order dated 23.12.2021 and directed the present respondent to dispose of the representation dated 4.10.2021 in accordance with law by passing a speaking and reasoned order within 4 weeks. Though the representation of the applicant dated 4.10.2021 was disposed of by the respondents, the applicant filed Contempt Petition No. 13/2022 and notice of contempt was issued by this Tribunal. The respondents filed MA 320/2022 praying for initiating criminal proceeding against the applicant for filing contempt petition with misleading facts even though his representation was disposed of by passing a reasoned order dated 22.4.2022 which was duly communicated to the applicant. This Tribunal heard the CP 13/2022 and MA 320/2022 and the MA 320/2022 was disposed of after recording unconditional apology from the applicant since he was appearing in person and lacking experience. After the CP 13/2020 was dropped this Tribunal gave liberty to the applicant to file fresh OA if he is not satisfied with the reasoned order dated 22.4.2021 passed by respondent No.2. Now the applicant has approached this Tribunal again in OA 353/2022.
The respondents have stated that the present OA is not maintainable and the applicant is also not entitled for the reliefs claimed in the present OA since the representation of the applicant dated 4.10.2021 has already been disposed of by passing a reasoned and speaking order dated 22.4.2022 by partly allowing the claim of the applicant to which he was otherwise entitled as per prevailing circular and guidelines of the Department.
It is further submitted by the respondents that the applicant initially joined as PA Grade-I on 24.1.1995 and finally he was relieved from the post of Sr. Manager (Admn. & Accounts) on 30.5.2020 having reached the date of superannuation. While working as Sr. Manager (Admn. & Accounts) the applicant was transferred to Rayagada vide order dated 30.1.2020 by the then Managing Director. Being aggrieved by such transfer order the applicant filed OA 55/2020 before this Tribunal wherein the Tribunal directed that if no successor has joined in place of the applicant as against the post at Bhubaneswar from which he was relieved, then the said post be kept vacant, no coercive steps be taken against the applicant till disposal and communication of the order on the representation of the applicant for consideration of the transfer order. The applicant being transferred from Bhubaneswar to Rayagada remained on leave. His leave applications were sanctioned by the present respondent and he was getting his monthly remuneration as he had balanced leaves. Further this Tribunal in MA 238/2020 directed the applicant to join CTTC Bhubaneswar on 30.5.2020. The applicant joined and on the same date he was relieved vide order dated 30.5.2020 having reached the date of superannuation.
Though the applicant was relieved on 30.5.2020, since he superannuated he received all retiral benefits without any complain. It was only on 4.10.2021 he made a representation asking for further retirement benefits under various heads which was duly considered. He was paid leave encashment of Rs.37,515/- through NEFT on 19.4.2022, gratuity of Rs.56,460/- through cheque No. 800527 dated 8.6.2022. Vide order dated 22.4.2022 the applicant was informed that leave encashment, incentive and House Rent Allowance have already been paid to him. With regard to DA and PF the applicant was informed that he is not entitled for any further amount. It is further submitted by the respondents that House Rent Allowance was paid at 8% to the applicant as against 16% payable for people posted at Bhubaneswar as he was transferred from Bhubaneswar to Rayagada and he was directed to join on 30.5.2020 at Bhubaneswar by virtue of order of this Tribunal dated 28.5.2020 and eventually he retired on the same day i.e. on 30.5.2020. Therefore since the applicant has not worked at Bhubaneswar from 30.1.2020 to 30.5.2020, he is not entitled for the HRA at 16% as claimed by him.
With regard to the claim made by the applicant for further deposit of PF amount in existing PF account it is submitted by the respondents that the applicant has been paid whatever was due to him towards PF. Further the applicant has not stated towards what extent of PF is due to him and for which period. Hence in absence of such details, the present respondent is not in a position to answer the claim made by the applicant. Regarding incentive as claimed by the applicant for the year 2019-20, the Governing Council of the Respondent No.2 in its 50th meeting held on 10.11.2020 has already submitted a separate proposal to the Chairman’s Office on 21.1.2021 for necessary approvals but the same is yet to be approved. Once the proposal is approved the same will be disbursed to the eligible employees/ex-employees. The claim towards enhanced DA of 4% from 17% to 21% for the period 1.1.2020 to 31.5.2020 as claimed by the applicant does not arise since he has already been given DA at 17% for the period 1.1.2020 to 31.5.2020. The respondents have therefore prayed for dismissal of the present OA since the applicant is not entitled to the relief as claimed by him.
The applicant has filed a rejoinder to the counter filed by the respondents. It is submitted by the applicant that he took leave without joining at Rayagada due to his sickness and subsequently as per the order of this Tribunal he joined at Bhubaneswar on 30.5.2020 and on the same date he stood relieved on superannuation. The applicant submitted that he has been paid HRA @ 8% for February, March & April, 2020 which is applicable to Rayagada when he was in Bhubaneswar till the date of his retirement. Hence the respondents are liable to pay balance HRA @ 8% for three months i.e. February, March & April, 2020. The applicant has also prayed for a direction to the respondent No.1 to approve the incentive for the year 2019-20 within a specified date so that he and other eligible employees may get their pending dues.
Heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the materials available on record.
The reliefs claimed by the applicant have already been granted in his favour by the respondents. Regarding incentive as claimed by the applicant for the year 2019-20, the Governing Council of the Respondent No.2 in its 50th meeting held on 10.11.2020 has already submitted a separate proposal to the Chairman’s Office on 21.1.2021 for necessary approvals but the same is yet to be approved. The respondents have submitted that once the proposal is approved the same will be disbursed to the eligible employees/ex-employees. It is submitted by the applicant that he was transferred to Rayagada vide transfer order dated 30.1.2020. He took leave without joining at Rayagada due to his sickness and subsequently as per the order of this Tribunal he joined at Bhubaneswar on 30.5.2020 and on the same date he stood relieved on superannuation. The applicant submitted that he has been paid HRA @ 8% for February, March & April, 2020 which is applicable to Rayagada when he was in Bhubaneswar till the date of his retirement. Hence the respondents are liable to pay balance HRA @ 8% for three months i.e. February, March & April, 2020. It is submitted by the respondents that House Rent Allowance was paid at 8% to the applicant as against 16% payable for people posted at Bhubaneswar as he was transferred from Bhubaneswar to Rayagada and he was directed to join on 30.5.2020 at Bhubaneswar by virtue of order of this Tribunal dated 28.5.2020 and eventually he retired on the same day i.e. on 30.5.2020. Therefore since the applicant has not worked at Bhubaneswar from 30.1.2020 to 30.5.2020, he is not entitled for the HRA at 16% as claimed by him. Hence the applicant is not entitled to any relief claimed by him in the present OA.
Therefore the OA is dismissed. No order as to costs.