Original Application No. 467 of 2012. Case: Ashwani Kumar Choudhary Vs Union of India and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

Case NumberOriginal Application No. 467 of 2012
CounselFor Appellant: Sri O.P. Srivastava assisted by Sri Rajan Mishra, Advs. and For Respondents: A.K. Pandey, Adv.
JudgesMr. V.C. Gupta, Member-J
IssueAdministrative Tribunals Act 1985 - Section 19
Judgement DateMay 15, 2017
CourtCentral Administrative Tribunal


  1. By means of this O.A. filed under Section 19 of A.T. Act, 1985, the applicant has sought the following relief(s):-

    -- (i) This Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to refund the illegally deducted amount of Rs. 40,800/- from the Gratuity of the applicant alongwith the interest on market rate within some reasonable time which may be 2 weeks and the respondents be further directed to make the payment of regular pension to the applicant on the basis of the last pay drawn by him in accordance with the pay fixation made under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme vide order dated 14.1.2010 as contained in Annexure no.3 to the Original Application and the contrary orders if any passed by the respondents may be summoned and quashed.

    (ii) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to direct the respondents to make the payment of balance amount towards leave encashment on the basis of the pay fixation order dated 14.1.2010 and accordingly the regular pension of the applicant may also be fixed and the same may be paid to the applicant regularly.

    (iii) This Honble Tribunal may further be pleased to direct the respondents to make the payment of interest on the delayed payment of the aforesaid illegally deducted amount as well as the withheld amount from the gratuity and the lesser payment of leave encashment for the period from the date of retirement of the applicant from service i.e. from 15.10.2010 till the date of actual payment at market rate within some reasonable time.

    (iv) This Hon'ble Tribunal may also be pleased to pass such other orders which are found just fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

    (v) This Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the cost of the original application in favour of the applicant.

  2. The facts giving rise to this Original Application in nutshell are that the applicant as a direct recruit, joined as Assistant Enforcement officer in the Directorate of Enforcement on 28.1.1976. He got his first promotion on 2.1.1989 as Enforcement Officer. Thereafter, he got the benefit of financial up-gradation under Assured Career Progression (ACP) scheme on 29.1.2000 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 9000/- and next increment becomes payable in the month of January, 2001. Later-on, he was given financial up-gradation on completion of four years and was granted the next higher pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500/- w.e.f. 4.10.2005 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 10,475/-. He was, then, promoted to the next higher post of Chief Enforcement Officer/Assistant Director-II on 15.5.2007 in the same pay scale of Rs. 8000-13500/- on adhoc basis. His adhoc promotion was regularized on the post of Chief Enforcement Officer/Assistant Director-II on 6.5.2008. His salary remained unaffected. The applicant was, thereafter, given financial up-gradation under Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) scheme by granting the benefit of Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- in PB-3 w.e.f. 1.9.2008 on completion of 30 years of service and he was placed in the higher Grade Pay, as stated hereinabove from 17.11.2009 giving effect from 1.7.2008. Thereafter, the applicant applied for voluntary retirement and his request was accepted and retired from service on 15.10.2010 after rendering about 34 years of qualifying service. After retirement, his post retiral benefits were withheld and were not paid in spite of repeated requests made by the applicant. The applicant was asked by the department that the final settlement will take some time; hence applicant was orally informed that the department has decided to give provisional pension to the applicant till finalization of post retiral benefits. An internal correspondence was made in this regard, a copy of which was also addressed to the applicant. It was contended that no disciplinary proceedings or any adverse action was pending against the applicant and settlement dues were illegally withheld. Later-on, it was found that the post retiral benefits were stopped on the ground that there is some excess payment. However, he was not informed that under what head the excess payment was made. As the applicant was facing financial crisis after retirement, he informed that excess payment, if any, may be deducted from the settlement dues and release his pension and other retiral dues. Only thereafter, the applicant was allowed regular pension from the month of December, 2011. He was also paid Gratuity and other retiral benefits simultaneously after a lapse of about 14 months from the date of his retirement. A chart of payment made has been disclosed in Annexure no.6 to the O.A., which is extracted here-in-below for ready reference:-

    Sl. No.



    Received on credit to the account


    CGEGIS (Insurance) payment...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT