AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
None present for the applicant even in revised call. Shri Vidyapati Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondents, is present. The instant original application is being decided on merits taking recourse to the provision of Rule 15(1) of Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987 and after hearing learned counsel for the respondents.
The instant original application has been filed by the applicant seeking following relief:
“i.to issue an order or direction, directing the respondents provide interest on the gratuity, C.G.I.G.I.S. Leave Encashment and Arrear of Pension and Arrear of Family Pension to the parents of the applicant.
ii.to issue any other order or direction, directing the respondents to provide yearwise details of pension and family pension to the applicant.
iii.to issue any other order or direction which may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
iii.to award cost of petition in favour of the applicant.”
The applicant is aggrieved by non-payment of interest on the amount of gratuity, C.G.I.G.I.S., Leave Encashment and Arrear of Pension and Arrear of Family Pension to him.
The brief facts of the case as narrated in the OA are that the father of the applicant was appointed on 03.05.1956 as Sepoy in Central Excise Department and while he was working at Allahabad in the year 1975, he met with an accident on duty and was hospitalized and after discharge, he was not able to discharge his duties. Thereafter, the father of the applicant on 28.03.1988 made an application before the respondents to discharge him from duty but no response was received. On 01.03.1990, he also made an application for voluntary retirement. Later on 31.07.1994, he was superannuated but no terminal benefits were provided. Subsequently, he filed Writ Petition No 3386 of 1998 before the Hon’ble High Court of Central Administrative TribunalAllahabad seeking terminal benefits and the petition was disposed of vide order dated 30.09.2013 directing the respondents to pay the retiral dues. The respondents issued order dated 14.11.2014 for payment of the terminal benefits to the applicant’s father. The applicant’s father died on 30.12.2014 and the mother of the applicant also died on 14.12.2018 but retiral dues and family pension of the mother of the applicant paid on 04.05.2022 amounting Rs. 11,13,689/- in the account of the applicant but interest on that amount was not paid. Thus, by way of this OA, the applicant seeks a direction to the respondents authorities to pay the interest on the aforesaid payment in a time bound manner.
Counter has been filed by the respondents wherein it is stated that the all the terminal benefits have already been paid to the applicant and no dues are left to be paid. Further, nowhere in any judgment, any direction was given to the respondents authorities to pay interest on the aforesaid payment.
Rejoinder has also been filed by the applicant reiterating the facts and circumstances of the case as narrated in the OA.
I have heard learned counsel for the respondents.
Learned counsel for the respondents referring to his counter affidavit, has argued that a disciplinary case under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 was undergoing against the father of the applicant wherein charge sheet dated 16.06.1994 was issued and thus the matter of the applicant was depending on the final outcome of the said disciplinary proceedings. After the finalization of the proceedings, all the retiral dues were paid to the applicant. In this regard, the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad also stood complied with. However, no interest is admissible to the applicant and thus, prayer was made to dismiss the OA being devoid of merits.
I have considered the contentions and gone through the records.
A perusal of the record reveals that applicant’s father was superannuated after completing the service on 31.07.1994. Post retiral dues were withheld by the respondents. Thereafter, the Central Administrative Tribunalapplicant’s father approached before the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in Writ A No. 3386/1998 and it was decided vide order dated 30.09.2013 with the following directions:
“In this view of the matter, this petition is disposed of finally in terms of undertaking given by Shri V.K. Raghuwanshi learned counsel appearing for the respondents and the respondents are directed to pay the post retiral benefits to the petition in accordance with law within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before the authority concerned.”
It further appears that a competent petition was also filed when the respondents did not comply with the direction given in the aforesaid Writ Petition as Contempt Application (Civil) No. 171 of 2014 before the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad itself which was decided on 20.04.2022 closing the proceedings of the CP. Learned counsel for the respondents has argued that entire dues had been released in favour of the applicant during the pendency of the CP itself. Since, no direction was given in the Writ A No 3386 of 1998 to pay interest on the retiral dues to the applicant’s father, due to this reason, it was not paid.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that since issue involved in the present matter has already been adjudicated in the Writ Petition No 3386 of 1998, the present original application claiming interest on the same amount again cannot be allowed. Thus, the OA is dismissed.
All associated MAs stand disposed of accordingly. No costs.