GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI Vs. MAHENDRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is directed against the order of Central Administrative Tribunal (Principal Bench) dated 30.9.2011 passed in OA No. 2487/2010, whereby the Tribunal directed the petitioners before this Court, to release pensionary benefits of the respondent before this Court viz. Mr. Mahender Singh, within two months from the date of receipt of the order. The respondent Mahender Singh, who superannuated from service on 31.7.2009, was appointed as Horticulturist in the office of Development Department, Delhi w.e.f. 4.11.1986, after he had worked as Junior Technical Assistant in Development Department from 1.5.1970 to 2.2.1973 and as Section Officer (Horticulture) in CPWD from 3.2.1973 to 3.11.1986. On receipt of complaints that the respondent in fact belonged to 'Gadaria' caste, the department referred the matter to District Magistrate Muzaffarnagar to verify the caste of the respondent. District Magistrate, Muzzaffarnagar vide his letter dated 6.5.1995, reported that the respondent belongs to the caste 'Gadaria, which is not a scheduled caste in Uttar Pradesh. The respondent filed a Civil Suit against State of Uttar Pradesh and the Collector Muzaffarnagar seeking injunction directing them to provide a scheduled caste certificate to him. The suit was dismissed vide order dated 22.4.2008 and an appeal filed by the respondent against that order is stated to be pending. Since the respondent had obtained two scheduled caste certificates; one issued on 19.1.1971 by Deputy Commissioner, Delhi showing him as resident of 387, Hauz Quazi, Delhi-110006 and the other from Deputy Commissioner, Delhi on 27.3.1979 showing him as resident of 1557 Timarpur, Delhi, the Department requested Deputy Commissioner, Delhi to investigate into the matter. Deputy Commissioner, Delhi issued a show-cause notice dated 28.6.1995 to the respondent, who submitted an interim reply on 11.8.1995 informing that the Civil Court had granted a stay not to initiate any adverse action against him. Since retiral benefits of the respondent were not paid despite representations made by him from time to time. He filed OA No. 2487/2010 which came to be allowed vide order dated 30.9.2011, impugned in this petition.

(2.) The allegation against the respondent thus, is that he had submitted false certificates with respect to his caste status. The Civil Suit filed by him, claiming to be a scheduled caste in Uttar Pradesh has been dismissed, though the appeal filed by him is stated to be pending. It is however, not in dispute that despite receiving complaints against the respondent neither any departmental proceedings were instituted nor any FIR was lodged by the petitioner against him.

(3.) Assuming, that the respondent did not belong to a scheduled caste and had submitted false caste certificates, the petitioners had no legal right to withhold his pensionary benefits, when no departmental inquiry was instituted against him, at any point of time. The respondent has a legal right to obtain the pensionary benefits which became due to him on his superannuation from service. The petitioners have not brought any statutory provision or any rule or regulation to our notice whereby they may withhold the pensionary benefits of the respondent, despite no departmental inquiry having been instituted against him. We are, therefore, in agreement with the Tribunal that the petitioners had no authority, in law, to withhold the pensionary benefits which became payable to the respondent on his superannuation.