it2025_00895 — When case is pending and representation is also pending, payment of reduced pay and allowance before finalization of the case amounts to double jeopardy and hence, Respondents directed to refix the pay as requested for in the Representation

When case is pending and representation is also pending, payment of reduced pay and allowance before finalization of the case amounts to double jeopardy and hence, Respondents directed to refix the pay as requested for in the Representation — The chunk provided refers to an ongoing disciplinary proceeding against the applicant, where the original charge-sheet was quashed by the Tribunal and the High Court, and a fresh charge-sheet was ord... — Facts: The version of the Applicant is that, he was placed under suspension, with effect from 10-12-2012 which was not reviewed and as such, the same is violative of Rule 10 (6) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and after lapse of 97 days, suspension, order was revoked with effect from 10-3-2013. Thereafter, he was again placed under prolonged suspension, with effect from 13-3-2013 till his reinstatement on 31-1-2020 (FN). Thus, due to non-following of statutory provisions, the suspension, which extended till imposition of penalty of compulsory retirement by Order, dated 21-4-2017 is illegal. The compulsory retirement of the Applicant had been set aside by this Tribunal vide judgment and Order, dated 6-5-2019 in O.A. No. 41 of 2018 which had been upheld by the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court (Itanagar Bench) vide common judgment and Order, dated 9-12-2019 passed in W.P.(C) Nos. 441(AP) of 2019 and W.P.(C) No. 236(AP) of 2019. Thereafter, the Respondents had reinstated the Applicant in service with effect from 31-1-2020 and he worked till his retirement on superannuation on 31-1-2021. However, the Principal Accountant General, Arunachal Pradesh did not fix the pay and allowance of the Applicant due and admissible to him after his reinstatement in service i.e. as on 31-1-2020. The Applicant was paid pay and allowances at the rate of Basic Pay of ₹ 53,100.00 (i.e. at the Level-9, Stage-I of Pay Matrix Table) for the period from 1-3-2020 to 31-1-2021 although he resumed his duty on 31-1-2020 after revocation of the suspension. Further, after reinstatement of the Applicant in service, the Respondents did not pass any order with regard to the fixation and regularization of pay and allowances for the period of suspension, i.e. with effect from 10-12-2012. Applicant had submitted a detailed representation, on 6-12-2020 to the Principal Accountant-General, Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar (Respondent No. 2) for fixation and regularization of his pay and allowances for preparation and submission of pension papers and CGHS papers, though afterwards the CGHS Card was issued on 25-1-2022 at a lower category. In the said representation, Applicant gave a full picture of the suspension affair, his success in getting the order of compulsory retirement set aside, which has resulted in his reinstatement and continuance in service till superannuation. Subsequently, the post of Accounts Officer (Level-9) and Senior Accounts Officer (Level-10) was merged and upgraded to Senior Accounts Officer with effect from 19-11-2019. He was getting pay and allowances at Stage-1 of Level-9 i.e. @ ₹ 53,100.00 with effect from March 2020. Hence, he requested to the Principal Accountant-General, Arunachal Pradesh to revise and fix his pay in the post of A.O. and correspondingly in the post of Sr. A.O. He also stated that after imposition of compulsory retirement from service with effect from 21-4-2017, the DCRG/GPF/Cash Equivalent of Leave salary and CGEGIS was paid to him at a lesser rate. He had refunded the CGEGIS money amounting to ₹ 48,083 and requested for adjustment with his salaries, the Cash Equivalent of Leave salary and retirement gratuity. He also requested to adjust the cash equivalent of leave salary and Retirement gratuity amount paid to him, if required, he was ready to refund. His date of retirement on superannuation was 31-1-2021 and as such, he requested to issue necessary orders for making arrangement of pay fixation, regularization of his pay and allowances with effect from 10-12-2012. The Applicant renewed his request claiming the same benefits, vide communication, dated 4-1-2021. His Basic Pay as on 31-1-2021 has been wrongly fixed at ₹ 53,100 (i.e. at Level-9, Stage-1); and also has not been revised with effect from 10-12-2012 till his retirement. Applicant had also submitted another representation on 27-9-2021 to the Principal Accountant-General, Arunachal Pradesh, Itanagar for immediate release of his pay and allowances including arrear salary from 10-12-2012 to 30-1-2020. Learned Counsel for the Applicant has submitted that Applicant was initially placed under suspension, in the year 2012 and in the meantime, he was served with a charge-sheet, dated 9-5-2013. Though Applicant had participated and denied the allegations made in the said charge-sheet, the Disciplinary Authority imposed a penalty of punishment of compulsory retirement vide Order, dated 21-4-2017 (Annexure-A/7). Being aggrieved, Applicant preferred an Appeal, dated 31-8-2017 (Annexure-A/8), before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority vide Order, dated 20-10-2017 (Annexure-A/11) had quashed and set aside the penalty Order of the Disciplinary Authority and remitted back the matter to the AG and DA for holding de novo inquiry by withdrawing earlier charge-sheet, dated 9-5-2013 and issuing a fresh charge-sheet. Being aggrieved with, Applicant had challenged the same before this Tribunal in O.A. No. 41 of 2018, whereby this Tribunal vide Order, dated 6-5-2019 had quashed the impugned Order of the Appellate Authority, dated 20-10-2017 for fresh enquiry/de novo inquiry, which was affirmed by the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court at Itanagar Permanent Bench with an opportunity to the Respondents for further enquiry as per Rule 15 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. It was further submitted that pursuant to the Order of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court at Itanagar Permanent Bench, the Respondents had again issued another Memo, dated 5-4-2021 and restored the original charge-sheet framed against the Applicant. Being aggrieved, he had filed another O.A. No. 122 of 2021 before this Tribunal, which was also disposed of vide Order, dated 8-11-2023 by quashing and setting aside the impugned Memo, dated 5-4-2021 as well as Letters, dated 6-4-2021 and further directing the Respondents to invoke Rule 9 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and to complete the Disciplinary Proceedings from the stage of deficit in conducting disciplinary proceedings occurred within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. However, no progress has been seen. In the meantime, though the Applicant retired, on 31-1-2021, he is only getting provisional pension in a lower pay as he has not been granted increment and further fixation since 2012 though penalty Order was already quashed by the Appellate Authority in the year 2017, which would be evident from perusal of the last Pay Slip of the Applicant as well as certificate issued by the Senior Deputy Accountant General, dated 10-8-2021. In this respect, he made a detailed representation before the Principal Accountant-General (Respondent No. 2) on 27-9-2021 which is still pending with Respondent No. 2. Counsel for the Applicant also claimed refixation of pay and allowances as no penalty order is extant. Additional CGSC appearing on behalf of the Respondents has filed the written statement wherein they have stated that since disciplinary proceeding is still pending and the penalty order was quashed on technical ground, therefore, they have not extended the increment and other benefits to the Applicant. Admittedly the Applicant was put under suspension, from 10-12-2012 and though suspension, order was quashed, the Applicant was again put under Suspension, till his retirement i.e. on 31-1-2021. It is also an admitted fact that the penalty order of compulsory retirement was quashed by the Appellate Authority himself; however, he had remanded back the matter for issuance of new charge-sheet, which was interfered and quashed by this Tribunal and affirmed by the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court Permanent Bench at Itanagar vide Order, dated 9-12-2019 in WP(C)/441(AP)/2019 and WP(C)/236(AP)/2019 by observing:

(a) "The petitioners after deciding to go ahead with the enquiry from a particular stage but on the earlier charges and if required some additional charges on the basis of the earlier enquiry report can very well be directed by the Disciplinary Authority to the Inquiry Officer within the scope of Rule 15 of CCS (CCA) Rules which liberty had been granted to the petitioners by the learned members, CAT and the same requires no interference by us.

(b) CAT took note of the fact that the Appellate Authority observed the infirmity in the order passed by the DA that the Respondent was deprived of denying the charges and as such remitted the same to the DA. This itself is sufficient to set aside the order of penalty and there was no requirement for a de novo inquiry. Once the order for de novo inquiry was set aside, the petitioners were given the liberty to act within the parameters of Rule 15 of the CCS (CCA) Rules as such in our considered opinion the same requires no interference.

(c) However once a decision is finalized by the DA, the stage of the proceeding for exercising its jurisdiction under Rule 15 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, liberty is always there to invoke the provisions of Rule 10 of the CCS (CCA) Rules but on the basis of a reasoned order and until then the Respondent is liable to be reinstated. From the said observation and discussion, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned orders of the Learned Members, CAT, Guwahati Bench. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of by this common order. No costs."