dofp2024_00811 — Applicant retired on superannuation on 31-5-2011 and his final settlement dues are not paid as it is stated that a judicial proceeding as per Rule 69 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 is pending against him. After analyzing the case, Tribunal held that the impugned order, dated 25-9-2014 (A/6) is pending against the Applicant at the time of his retirement. But no charge-sheet was issued and Applicant was not also informed of the pending case. Hence Tribunal ordered release of full retirement benefits

Applicant retired on superannuation on 31-5-2011 and his final settlement dues are not paid as it is stated that a judicial proceeding as per Rule 69 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 is pending against him. After analyzing the case, Tribunal held that the impugned order, dated 25-9-2014 (A/6) is pending against the Applicant at the time of his retirement. But no charge-sheet was issued and Applicant was not also informed of the pending case. Hence Tribunal ordered release of full retirement benefits as per law within three months of receipt of this judgment — The chunk pertains to an OA (Original Application) No. 587/14 filed by the Applicant, who was not informed that a CBI case was pending against him at the time of his retirement on 31-5-2011. This cas... — Facts :Applicant retired from service while working at Bhubaneshwar, on superannuation on 31-5-2011. His final settlement dues are not paid. Earlier he filed an O.A. No. 514/12 which was disposed of with a direction to consider his representation. When no action was taken, Applicant filed a C.P. No. 83/12 when provisional pension of the Applicant was paid. Applicant filed another O.A. No. 587/14 in which the Respondents stated that the Applicant as on the date of his retirement on 31-5-2011, a CBI case was pending against him for which sanction order is issued on 28-12-2010. But the Applicant was not informed till his retirement. Hence, this OA is filed for quashing the impugned letter, dated 25-9-2014 (A/6) and direct the Respondents to grant all retired benefits with interest urgently. Tribunal heard the case and read the submission of Applicant. Respondent relied on the Rule 69 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 to withhold sanction of full pensionary benefits to the Applicant. Rule 69 which deals with “Provisional pension where departmental or judicial proceedings be pending” is reproduced i.e. Paragraph (1)

(a) to c and (2). Further, the meaning of pending departmental and judicial proceedings have been clarified by DoP&T in the website for Pensioners' Portal (pensionersportal.gov.in/FAQ_civil.pdf) and Para. 1.7 of the said guidelines is reproduced which deals with departmental proceedings and its effects. As per Rule 69 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, the pension and gratuity can be withheld if any judicial proceeding is pending. Judicial proceedings is deemed to have been instituted against the Applicant if Magistrate had taken cognizance of it. As per Respondent, the judicial proceedings against the Applicant had been taken cognizance by Magistrate of Judge Court No. 11 (CBI). Even though it is stated that prosecution was given on 28-12-2010, the Applicant is not aware of the same and Applicant retired from service. Considering the details as noted above, the Tribunal opined that there was no justification for authorities to invoke provisions of the Rule 69 of the CCS (Pension) Rule, 1972 to withhold the retirement benefits of the Applicant in this case.