Central Administrative Tribunal

Ghulam Mohi UD Din Ganaie vs HOME DEPARTMENT on 22 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL SRINAGAR Order Sheet Item no.: 13 O.A./346/2024 (SRINAGAR) [ RECOVERY ] [ SENIOR CITIZEN ] With MODIFICATION OF ORDER Along With O.A./1059/2021 DATE OF BIRTH Court No.: 2 No of Adjournment: 21 Order Dated: 22/10/2026 GHULAM MOHI UD DIN GANAIE Vs HOME DEPARTMENT

For Applicant(s) Advocate : S.A.MAKROO - Sr. Adv. WITH RAAHIL NOOR

For Respondent(s) Advocate : RAIS UD DIN GANAI - DAG, BIKRAM DEEP SINGH VIA VIRTUAL MODE Order of The Tribunal 01/ Perusal of averments made in this O.A reveal that the matter pertains to release of pension and allied benefits in favour of the petitioner. 02/ In terms of order dated 23-09-2026, the respondents were directed to release the amount to the petitioner, however, after retaining the alleged disputed amount, which would secure their interests as well. 02/ It goes without saying that pension is not a bounty, it is a right of an employee and this assertion has even attained status of a constitutional right under article 300- A. 03/ Ordinarily, order dated 23-09-2026 ought to have been complied with in its letter and spirit, when learned counsel for the petitioner had even consented to the retention of the disputed amount. Denial of release of undisputed amount certainly violates article 21 of the Constitution of India. Needless to say that every public servant has to reach the day of superannuation and it is for this reason a pensioner deserves a soft gloves attitude on the part of his employer. Denial of legitimately earned pension and related benefits are not only violative of service laws but also, in my humble estimation, it is violative of human rights of an employee/pensioner. 04/ Heard learned counsel for the parties. 05/ It is expected that the respondents will consider release of legitimately earned provisional pension of the petitioner and related benefits with arrears, of course, after retaining the alleged disputed amount, as mentioned in the order impugned herein. To this effect, the petitioner is directed to file an undertaking before the competent authority that he will be bound by the ultimate decision of this petition.

06/ It is made clear that, for compliance of this order, all the respondents shall cooperate so that release of pension and its allied benefits to the petitioner are not delayed any further, however, subject to the conditions stipulated in this order supra. It is further provided that any delay in doing the needful entitles the petitioner to the interest in accordance with law. 07/ List for consideration on 04-12-2026. This order shall remain subject to final outcome of the O.A. M. S. Latif Member (J) Tariq Mota ( ps consultant )

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead