K VASUDEVA REDDY vs Dept of Posts on 28 December 2018

1. The Union of India rep. by its Secretary, Govt. Of India, M/o Communications & IT, Dept. Of Posts- India, Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001.

2. The Chief Postmaster General, Telangana Circle, Dak Sadan, Abids, Hyderabad-500 001.

3. The Director of Postal Services, Hyderabad City Region, O/o Chief Postmaster General, Telangana, Dak Sadan, Hyderabad-500 001.

4. The Senior Superintendent of Railway Mail Service, Hyderabad Sorting Division, Hyderabad-500 027.

... Respondents

Counsel for the Applicant ... Mr.M.Venkanna Counsel for the Respondents ... Mr..K.Venkateswarlu, Addl.CGSC Rep., by Mrs.B.Swarna

**CORAM:**

**THE HON'BLE MRS.NAINI JAYASEELAN, MEMBER (ADMN.)**

Ka

.....2

2The logo of the Central Administrative Tribunal, featuring a circular emblem with a sun-like design in the center, surrounded by the text 'Central Administrative Tribunal' and 'सर्वोत्तम कार्य' (Savottam Kaam) at the bottom.**ORAL ORDER**

(As per Hon'ble Mrs.Naini Jayaseelan, Member (Admn.))

**The Brief facts of the case:**

The applicant has challenged the impugned order of the 4^th respondent vide letter No.1/Acctt/Pen.305/95-96/2015-16, dated 27.03.2016 by which the claim of the applicant for payment of interest on delayed pension payment was rejected, stating that there is no provision for payment of such interest on pension and pensionary benefits.

2. The learned counsel for the Applicant argued that the above decision is in disregard to the specific orders of this Tribunal in O.A.No.997/2013, dated 10.04.2015. The OA.No.997/2013 was filed by the applicant because the applicant has not received his pensionary benefits and was living in USA. The Tribunal directed the respondents to pay interest on delayed disbursement of terminal benefits at the prevailing GPF rates.

3. The respondents in their reply statement have stated that since the applicant had not submitted a clear certificate of his employment during his stay in USA, his pensionary benefits were not released. The Tribunal specifically ordered as under:

*" Be that as it may, the applicant is directed to submit a clear certificate as required by the respondents regarding his employment status during his stay in the USA within a period of two weeks from the date of*

A handwritten signature or mark, possibly initials, located at the bottom left of the page.

3The logo of the Central Administrative Tribunal, featuring a circular emblem with a sunburst design in the center, surrounded by the text 'Central Administrative Tribunal' and 'भारत सेवा केन्द्र' at the bottom.

receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of such a certificate, the respondents shall consider the Annexure.IV letter dated 24.01.2010 of the 4^th respondent and disburse expeditiously the arrears of pension due to the applicant within a period of four weeks thereafter. If the arrears due to him are not disbursed within the aforesaid period, the applicant would be eligible to get interest at the prevailing GPF rate interest on the pension due to him from the date of his representation dated 30.11.2010."

4. It is the contention of the respondents that the applicant had delayed the furnishing of the certificate of non-employment of his stay in the USA. However, on checking the records, it is seen that the certificate was submitted on 17.04.2015 after the orders of this Tribunal dated 10.04.2015. Therefore, no delay can be attributable to the applicant for submission of the said certificate.

5. The respondents have taken the plea that there is no provision for payment of interest on pension and pensionary benefits as laid down in Rule 68(3) (i) (a) (c) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. However, in the instant case, there is a specific order of this Tribunal for payment of interest on delayed pension. The specific order of this Tribunal categorically stated that if the arrears due to him are not disbursed within the aforesaid period, the applicant would be eligible to get interest at the prevailing GPF rate interest on the pension due to him from the date of his representation dated 30.11.2010.

.....4

4


6. In view of the specific orders of this Tribunal, the present OA is allowed reiterating the earlier order dated 10.04.2015 passed in O.A.No.997/2013.

7. No order as to costs.

प्रमाणित प्रति **CERTIFIED TRUE COPY**

केस संख्या CASE NUMBER: OA 1229 / 2016 दिनांक पर प्रमाणित DATE OF CERTIFICATION: 28-12-2018 कॉपी तैयार करने का तारीख DATE MADE BY: 7-1-2019

Nim 7/1/19

अनुभाग अधिकारी / प्रधान न्यायाधीश Section Officer / Court Officer केन्द्रीय प्रशासनिक अधिकारण Central Administrative Tribunal हैदराबाद न्यायाधीश/Hyderabad Bench