dofp2024_00810 — Applicant who is entitled for commutation of pension from the date of his retirement as per Rule 13 (3) of CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 without recovery of commutation of pension paid to the Applicant herein from 1-3-2013 to 14-12-2016 are not legally sustainable. Hence, the relief prayed for in the OA to disburse the Commuted Value of Pension (CVP) to him based on commutation factor of 8.194 as applicable on 1-3-2013 whereby the recovery from him the excess amount of pension paid to

DoFP

Applicant who is entitled for commutation of pension from the date of his retirement as per Rule 13 (3) of CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 without recovery of commutation of pension paid to the Applicant herein from 1-3-2013 to 14-12-2016 are not legally sustainable. Hence, the relief prayed for in the OA to disburse the Commuted Value of Pension (CVP) to him based on commutation factor of 8.194 as applicable on 1-3-2013 whereby the recovery from him the excess amount of pension paid to him from 1-3-2013 till he had drawn 100% provisional pension is not legally sustainable. Hence, the relief prayed for in the OA as well as M.A. No. 368/2019 are not permissible — This chunk is from an Original Application (OA No. 442 of 2017) concerning a retired government employee, who was charged under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, but was exonerated in April 2016. The... — Facts: Applicant herein is issued with a charge-sheet on 9-8-2012 under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. While the charge-sheet was pending, Applicant retired from service on 28-2-2013 on superannuation. He was exonerated of the charges due to which he was charge-sheeted on 29-4-2016 (A/2). Thereafter, the Commuted Value of Pension (CVP) which was not sanctioned due to pending disciplinary proceedings against the Applicant was sanctioned by order, dated 27-4-2016 (A/4) with commutation factor of 8.194 as if the commutation of pension was sanctioned immediately after retirement on 28-2-2013. But sanction was returned to the Sanctioning Authority to revise the sanction of CVP with a modified commutation factor as per actual age of the Applicant at the time of the sanction. Modified sanction order was issued with the factor of 7.862 (less than 8.194) taking the age on next birthday to be 64 years ( in place of 61 years as assumed in the earlier sanction) and PAO was moved vide letter, dated 9-12-2016 (A/5). Against that, the Applicant filed an appeal, dated 25-3-2017 (A/6) to the authorities which was not considered for reasons mentioned in the letter, dated 19-5-2017 (A/7). Being aggrieved by the above reduction in the factor as 7.862, the Applicant filed this OA. Respondents filed the reply. Under Rule 6 (1) (i-a) of the CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rule 1981, commutation of pension did not become absolute from the date of retirement of the Applicant as he could not be sanctioned superannuation pension due to pending proceedings on 29-4-2016, the date on which Applicant was exonerated of the charges against him when he was 63 years old. Hence, CVP was changed from ₹ 6,07,198 to 6,32,840 i.e. with additional amount of ₹ 25,642 payable to the Applicant subject to recovery from him the excess amount of pension paid to him from 1-3-2013 till he had drawn provisional pension. Aggrieved by the above, Applicant filed M.A. No. 368/2019, dated 3-4-2019. Respondents filed Counter to MA ( in short CMA) justifying as per the reduced factor 7.862. Tribunal heard both sides. Rule 13 (3) of the CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 is reproduced vide (3) (a), (b),
(c) and (d). Applicant was allowed provisional pension due to pending charge-sheet on the date of his retirement under Rule 69 of the said rules. Respondents did not specifically contradict in Para. 8 of the counter the statement of the Applicant in his rejoinder in M.A. No. 368/2019. Rule 35 of CCS (Pension) Rule, 1972 states that “a superannuation pension shall be granted to a Government servant who is retired on his attaining age of compulsory retirement. Applicant was sanctioned provisional pension on his retirement due to pending disciplinary proceeding which cannot be treated as superannuation pension for the purpose of Rule 13 (3) of CCS (Commutation of Pension) rule which rule is reproduced in the judgment. DP&PW's OM, dated 12-11-1999 (A/10) referred by Applicant to support his prayer states “where a pensioner is exonerated as a result of departmental proceeding, commutation of pension is deemed to have fallen on the date of retirement. Hence, after exoneration from departmental proceedings, it could have been reduced by the commutation value subject to fixation of final pension after finalization of the departmental proceedings against him, since the Applicant had asked for commutation of pension. There is nothing in the OM, dated 12-11-1999 (A/10) that there should not be any recovery if no deduction from the petitioner on account of commutation. As per OM, dated 12-11-1999, even though the Applicant is entitled for commutation of pension with effect from the date of his retirement, that OM is of no help to Applicant because of payment of 100% of pension as provisional pension without deduction of commutation value. The fact that the Applicant had received full normal pension from 1-3-2013 till 14-12-2016 will imply that the deduction from normal pension of the Applicant will be effectively from 15-12-2016 till 1-3-2028, which is less than 15 years if no recovery takes place. Thus, the Rule 10-A of CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 will be violated.

DoFP

Applicant who is entitled for commutation of pension from the date of his retirement as per Rule 13 (3) of CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 without recovery of commutation of pension paid to the Applicant herein from 1-3-2013 to 14-12-2016 are not legally sustainable. Hence, the relief prayed for in the OA to disburse the Commuted Value of Pension (CVP) to him based on commutation factor of 8.194 as applicable on 1-3-2013 whereby the recovery from him the excess amount of pension paid to him from 1-3-2013 till he had drawn 100% provisional pension is not legally sustainable. Hence, the relief prayed for in the OA as well as M.A. No. 368/2019 are not permissible — This chunk is from an Original Application (OA No. 442 of 2017) concerning a retired government employee, who was charged under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, but was exonerated in April 2016. The... — Facts: Applicant herein is issued with a charge-sheet on 9-8-2012 under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. While the charge-sheet was pending, Applicant retired from service on 28-2-2013 on superannuation. He was exonerated of the charges due to which he was charge-sheeted on 29-4-2016 (A/2). Thereafter, the Commuted Value of Pension (CVP) which was not sanctioned due to pending disciplinary proceedings against the Applicant was sanctioned by order, dated 27-4-2016 (A/4) with commutation factor of 8.194 as if the commutation of pension was sanctioned immediately after retirement on 28-2-2013. But sanction was returned to the Sanctioning Authority to revise the sanction of CVP with a modified commutation factor as per actual age of the Applicant at the time of the sanction. Modified sanction order was issued with the factor of 7.862 (less than 8.194) taking the age on next birthday to be 64 years ( in place of 61 years as assumed in the earlier sanction) and PAO was moved vide letter, dated 9-12-2016 (A/5). Against that, the Applicant filed an appeal, dated 25-3-2017 (A/6) to the authorities which was not considered for reasons mentioned in the letter, dated 19-5-2017 (A/7). Being aggrieved by the above reduction in the factor as 7.862, the Applicant filed this OA. Respondents filed the reply. Under Rule 6 (1) (i-a) of the CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rule 1981, commutation of pension did not become absolute from the date of retirement of the Applicant as he could not be sanctioned superannuation pension due to pending proceedings on 29-4-2016, the date on which Applicant was exonerated of the charges against him when he was 63 years old. Hence, CVP was changed from ₹ 6,07,198 to 6,32,840 i.e. with additional amount of ₹ 25,642 payable to the Applicant subject to recovery from him the excess amount of pension paid to him from 1-3-2013 till he had drawn provisional pension. Aggrieved by the above, Applicant filed M.A. No. 368/2019, dated 3-4-2019. Respondents filed Counter to MA ( in short CMA) justifying as per the reduced factor 7.862. Tribunal heard both sides. Rule 13 (3) of the CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 is reproduced vide (3) (a), (b),
(c) and (d). Applicant was allowed provisional pension due to pending charge-sheet on the date of his retirement under Rule 69 of the said rules. Respondents did not specifically contradict in Para. 8 of the counter the statement of the Applicant in his rejoinder in M.A. No. 368/2019. Rule 35 of CCS (Pension) Rule, 1972 states that “a superannuation pension shall be granted to a Government servant who is retired on his attaining age of compulsory retirement. Applicant was sanctioned provisional pension on his retirement due to pending disciplinary proceeding which cannot be treated as superannuation pension for the purpose of Rule 13 (3) of CCS (Commutation of Pension) rule which rule is reproduced in the judgment. DP&PW's OM, dated 12-11-1999 (A/10) referred by Applicant to support his prayer states “where a pensioner is exonerated as a result of departmental proceeding, commutation of pension is deemed to have fallen on the date of retirement. Hence, after exoneration from departmental proceedings, it could have been reduced by the commutation value subject to fixation of final pension after finalization of the departmental proceedings against him, since the Applicant had asked for commutation of pension. There is nothing in the OM, dated 12-11-1999 (A/10) that there should not be any recovery if no deduction from the petitioner on account of commutation. As per OM, dated 12-11-1999, even though the Applicant is entitled for commutation of pension with effect from the date of his retirement, that OM is of no help to Applicant because of payment of 100% of pension as provisional pension without deduction of commutation value. The fact that the Applicant had received full normal pension from 1-3-2013 till 14-12-2016 will imply that the deduction from normal pension of the Applicant will be effectively from 15-12-2016 till 1-3-2028, which is less than 15 years if no recovery takes place. Thus, the Rule 10-A of CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 will be violated.

Original Rule Text

Original Rule Text