BY AD v. REKHA VASUDEVAN

Heard Sri.T.V.Vinu, the learned Central Government Counsel for the petitioners/ respondents; and Smt.Rekha Vasudevan, the learned counsel for the respondents/applicants.

5. According to the learned Central OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..5.. Government Counsel, the commuted value of pension was not disbursed to the original applicant since disciplinary proceedings were pending against him. It is further submitted that noticing several lapses on the part of the original applicant, disciplinary proceedings were initiated in three different cases and upon culmination of inquiry in the third case, he was awarded with a punishment of compulsory retirement withholding 10% of pension for two years. The original applicant compulsorily retired with effect from 01.12.2020, who was granted eligibility pension amount; however, other benefits like retirement gratuity and commutation of pension were withheld. Since the original applicant retired from service, pending two inquiries were to be carried out as per Rule 9 of the Central Civil Services Pension Rules,

1972. According to the learned Central Government Counsel, the Tribunal ought not to have allowed OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..6.. the original application directing to disburse the commuted value of pension since on the demise of the original applicant, the application for commuted pension ceased to exist and the legal heir is not entitled to receive the commuted value of pension.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the original applicant had already submitted the application for commuted pension in the prescribed form and as per Annex.A3, the Accounts Department had calculated the amount of commuted pension on the basis of the application submitted by the original applicant and there was no necessity for any fresh application to be submitted and hence, the additional applicant is entitled to get commuted value of pension on the basis of the application already given by the original applicant.

7. The original applicant compulsorily OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..7.. retired from service with effect from 01.12.2020 pursuant to culmination of the enquiry. After compulsory retirement, the original applicant had submitted an application for commutation of pension on 23.02.2021. The said application was verified and the value of commuted pension was calculated at Rs.13,38,047/- as per Annex.A3. The respondents do not have a case that the application for commutation of pension was not filed by the original applicant while he was alive. The disciplinary action initiated against the original applicant was in three different cases alleged to have occurred during the period from 29.12.2017 to 25.10.2018; and out of the three cases, the Department concluded disciplinary proceedings in only one case. The original applicant died on 24.02.2023. The Department could have completed the disciplinary proceedings by that time. They have not stated any reason for the delay in concluding the OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..8.. disciplinary proceedings. On the death of the original applicant, the other two cases lapsed since the proceedings could not be finalized by the department authorities. The penalty was imposed only in the third case, which was already concluded by the Department. Situation being thus, the additional applicant is entitled to receive the commuted value of pension since the other two cases against the original applicant could not be proceeded with and the third case attained finality.

8. It is the case of the additional applicant that during the lifetime of the original applicant, he had requested the departmental authorities for release of the commuted value of pension due to him. He underwent amputation of left leg on 23.03.2022. Even during that time, the Department could not complete the disciplinary proceedings as against the original applicant and disburse the commuted OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..9.. value of pension to the original applicant. It is true that the disciplinary proceedings were pending against the original applicant. Disbursement of commuted pension was a great concern for an employee who unfortunately underwent a life-altering experience with the amputation of his left leg. Despite the evident hardships faced by the employee, there seems to be a lack of humanitarian consideration in the process of finalising the disciplinary proceedings and to disburse the commuted pension, if so entitled. The order of imposing compulsory retirement from service was not challenged by the original applicant. Admittedly, the proceedings against the original applicant were initiated in the year 2019. However, Annex.A1 order reveals that the charge memo in the third case was delivered on 12.04.2019. No reasons are stated as to the delay in finalizing the first two cases against the original applicant. The original OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..10.. application was filed by the original applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal in the year 2022. For reasons best known to the Department, they have not finalized the proceedings in the first two cases. After compulsory retirement from service, the original applicant filed the application for commutation of pension in the prescribed form as revealed from Annex.A3. The respondents are justified in withholding the amount since the cases against the original applicant were pending, but, on the death of the original applicant on 24.02.2023, all the allegations levelled against him have come to an end and the disciplinary proceedings also have become futile. Since the original applicant had already filed an application for commuted pension, the question of giving a new application does not arise. On the termination of the disciplinary proceedings, his legal heir is entitled to get the commuted value of pension. OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..11.. The contention that on the demise of the original applicant, the application for commuted pension also ceased to exist, was not raised before the Tribunal at the time of hearing. As per Rule 3(1) (b) of the Central Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981, an “applicant” means a government servant, including a retired government servant, who applies for commutation of fraction of pension in the prescribed form. Here, in this case, the original applicant had already applied for commuted value of pension while he was alive. As per Rule 6(1)(i) of the Central Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981, the commutation of pension shall become absolute on the date on which the application in Form 1 is received by the Head of Office. Annex.A3 reveals that the procedures were completed and the amount was quantified. The pending disciplinary proceedings have come to an end on the death of the original applicant. OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..12..

9. Therefore, we are of the view that the Tribunal is right in directing the respondents to release the commuted value of pension due to the original applicant. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, this OP(CAT) is dismissed. Sd/- A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE Sd/- SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN JUDGE bka/- OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..13.. APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 143/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 Annexure A2 Annexure A3 Annexure A4 Annexure R1 Annexure R2 Annexure MA1 Annexure MA2 Exhibit P1 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. VIG/17/NR/113/2020 DATED 01.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN O.A. TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER NO. POSTAL/KE/26276 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT IN O.A. TRUE COPY OF THE PART IV OF THE FORM NO.2 BY WHICH AN AMOUNT OF RS.13,38,047/- WAS SANCTIONED AS COMMUTTED VALUE OF PENSION TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED 29.03.2022 ISSUED BY DR CHARLES ABRAHAM, BELIEVERS CHURCH MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, THIRUVALLA TRUE EXTRACTS OF CCS (COMMUTATION OF PENSION) RULES, 1981 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER TO APPLICANT DATED 5-12-2022 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 10.03.2023 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, NEDUMPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT TRUE COPY OF THE ID PROOF DETAILS OF THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICANT IN THE MA (2ND RESPONDENT HEREIN) TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION, DATED 18.11.2022 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN AND NUMBERED AS O.A.NO.180/00668/2022 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT DATED 12.01.2023 IN O.A. NO.180/00668/2022 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH BY THE OP (CAT) NO. 143 OF 2023 ..14.. PETITIONERS HEREIN Exhibit P3 Exhibit P4 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF M.A.NO.480/2023 IN O.A.NO.180/00668/2022, DATED 02.06.2023 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT HEREIN TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.06.2023 IN M.A.NO.480/2023 IN O.A.NO.180/00668/2022 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.07.2023 IN O.A.NO.180/00668/2022 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH