ups_01244 — Applicant who was granted provisional pension due to a case registered by Anti-Corruption Bureau had no evidence in the case registered by Bureau. However, against the order of Anti-Corruption Bureau, District Sessions Judge refused to accept the 6 decisions of AntiCorruption Bureau. Against that order, the Division Bench of the High Court directed payment of interest due to delay in payment of pension. Hence the department appealed against that decision in Apex Court which allowed the appeal fi

UPS

Applicant who was granted provisional pension due to a case registered by Anti-Corruption Bureau had no evidence in the case registered by Bureau. However, against the order of Anti-Corruption Bureau, District Sessions Judge refused to accept the 6 decisions of AntiCorruption Bureau. Against that order, the Division Bench of the High Court directed payment of interest due to delay in payment of pension. Hence the department appealed against that decision in Apex Court which allowed the appeal filed by Applicant. The impugned order, Union of India v. Ambalal Patel [ 2016 SCC OnLine Guj. 3887 ] is set aside and the order of Tribunal directing payment of interest on Commuted Value of Pension (CVP) was set aside — This chunk discusses the issue of whether an applicant was entitled to seek commutation of provisional pension and whether he should be granted interest from the date of his retirement in view of the... — Facts: The first Respondent, Applicant was granted provisional pension on 4-8-2008. Though the case of Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) registered against the Applicant, the investigating officer found no evidence against the Applicant. Hence ACB submitted A-summary report before Principal Session Judge, who refused to accept the same. However, the criminal revision application filed thereagainst by the State was allowed. Applicant thereafter applied for interest on pensionary benefits, i.e. DCRG and CVP which was rejected. Applicant approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal directed payment of interest which was affirmed by the High Court. Hence the instant appeal before Supreme Court. On hearing both sides, the Apex Court held:

UPS

Applicant who was granted provisional pension due to a case registered by Anti-Corruption Bureau had no evidence in the case registered by Bureau. However, against the order of Anti-Corruption Bureau, District Sessions Judge refused to accept the 6 decisions of AntiCorruption Bureau. Against that order, the Division Bench of the High Court directed payment of interest due to delay in payment of pension. Hence the department appealed against that decision in Apex Court which allowed the appeal filed by Applicant. The impugned order, Union of India v. Ambalal Patel [ 2016 SCC OnLine Guj. 3887 ] is set aside and the order of Tribunal directing payment of interest on Commuted Value of Pension (CVP) was set aside — This chunk discusses the issue of whether an applicant was entitled to seek commutation of provisional pension and whether he should be granted interest from the date of his retirement in view of the... — Facts: The first Respondent, Applicant was granted provisional pension on 4-8-2008. Though the case of Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) registered against the Applicant, the investigating officer found no evidence against the Applicant. Hence ACB submitted A-summary report before Principal Session Judge, who refused to accept the same. However, the criminal revision application filed thereagainst by the State was allowed. Applicant thereafter applied for interest on pensionary benefits, i.e. DCRG and CVP which was rejected. Applicant approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal directed payment of interest which was affirmed by the High Court. Hence the instant appeal before Supreme Court. On hearing both sides, the Apex Court held:

Original Rule Text

Original Rule Text