SUKH DAYAL Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has instituted the present Civil Writ Petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing judgment dated 15.4.1998 (Annexure P-15) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') and order dated 26.8.1996 passed by respondent No.2-Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'ICAR'). It has further been prayed that a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued directing respondents No.2 to 4 to release the petitioner's pension, gratuity and retiral benefits with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the petitioner retired as an Assistant from respondent No.3-National Dairy Research Institute, Haryana on 31.5.1994. The petitioner was subjected to disciplinary proceedings and was suspended w.e.f. 12.2.1982, whereafter, statement of charges was served on the petitioner on 11.6.1982. It was alleged that the petitioner had failed to maintain absolute integrity, devotion to duty and acted in a manner highly unbecoming on the part of the Council's employee and had contravened Rules 3(1)(i), 3(1)(ii) and 3(1)(iii) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, as extended to ICAR employees. An Inquiry Officer was appointed to go into the charges. After enquiry, the petitioner was exonerated. The petitioner remained under suspension w.e.f. 12.2.1982 to 8.8.1985. The disciplinary authority (respondent No.2), however, did not agree with the report of the Inquiry Officer and, therefore, vide order dated 9.8.1985 (Annexure P-4) imposed a penalty of compulsory retirement with a further penalty of reduction of both pension and Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (hereinafter referred to as 'DCRG') to the extent of 1/3rd as admissible to the petitioner on the basis of service rendered by him at the Institute. It was further ordered that the period during which the petitioner remained under suspension, be treated as a period not spent on duty.

(3.) The petitioner preferred an appeal. The Appellate Authority vide order dated 19.11.1986 reduced the penalty of compulsory retirement and 1/3rd cut in pension and DCRG into reduction of two stages in the timescale of pay for a period of two years, without cumulative effect. It was further ordered that the period of absence from duty i.e. w.e.f. 9.8.1985 till the date of issue of earlier order of compulsory retirement, be treated as leave of the kind due and the said period shall not be counted for the purposes of seniority or increments but it was directed that it will count for the purposes of pension.