Release of Retiral Benefits IAS CAT Tribunal Chandigarh Case

Release of Retiral Benefits IAS CAT Tribunal Chandigarh Case wherein it was withheld lieu of pending chargesheet inquiry against the officer.

Guidance of the Court (Sukhjit Singh Bains, IAS (Retd.) v. Union of India)

Through this analysis, the author will try to understand the power of the court with respect to issuing orders guiding the functioning of other authorities. This analysis will provide an in-depth assimilation of the extent of the power the courts enjoy in such cases. It will also highlight the importance of court in such applications. Lastly, with the help of the various points in the judgement of this particular case, this analysis will explain the concept of delay in movement of work by authorities and how the court can intervene in those cases.

Also Read- Pay interest on delayed payment of retiral dues to former IAS

Facts

Applicant, Sh. Sukhjit Singh Bains, was a 2001 batch IAS officer of State of Punjab. He retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 28.02.2017. His retiral benefits were withheld due to pendency of charge-sheet issued on 20.02.2017 under Rule 8 of the All India Service Rules (Discipline and Appeal), Rules, 1969, which as per the statement of learned counsel for the applicant was dropped on 13.12.2018 (Annexure A-3). Immediately thereafter, applicant submitted representation dated 20.11.2019 (Annexure A-5) for release of retiral benefits followed by legal notice on 04.12.2019 (Annexure A-6) but till date payment has not been released. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant made a statement at the Bar that applicant will be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to decide his representation followed by legal notice.

Also Read- Harkesh Singh Sindhu vs D/O Personnel &Amp Training

Issues Involved

(a) Whether the court can direct an authority to provide an order in case of delay.

Rules and Laws

Rule 8 of the All India Service Rules (Discipline and Appeal), Rules, 1969

No order imposing major penalties. No order imposing any of the major penalties specified in rule 6 shall be made except after an inquiry is held. The inquiry must be held in accordance with the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act 1850 (37 of 1850) The disciplinary authority shall record its finding on each charge and shall act in the manner laid down in rule 9. Disciplinary authority may appoint a Government servant or a legal practitioner to present on its behalf the case in support of the articles of charge. Member of the Service may also take the assistance of a retired Government servant to present the case on his behalf. He must also provide a list of documents and witness by which each article of charge is proposed to be sustained. Disciplinary authority may appoint a Government servant or a legal practitioner to present on its behalf the case in support of the articles of charge. Member of the Service may take the assistance of any other Government servant to present the case on his behalf. Members of the service may also take assistance of a retired Government servant, subject to such conditions as may be specified by the President from time to time by general or special order in this behalf. The disciplinary authority may record the please sign the record and obtain the signature of the member of the Service thereon. 8(11) The inquiring authority shall return a finding of guilt in respect of [those] articles of charge to which the member of the Service pleads guilty. 8(12) If the member fails to appear within the specified time or refuses or omits to plead, require the Presenting Officer to produce the evidence by which he proposes to prove the article of charge and adjourn the case to a later date. 8 (13) On receipt of the notice for the discovery or production of documents, forward the same or copies thereof to the authority in whose custody or possession the documents are kept with a requisition. Authority having custody or possession of requisitioned documents may inform the inquiring authority. The witness may be cross-examined by, or on behalf of, the member of the Service. The Presenting Officer may be entitled to re-examine the witnesses on any point, on which they have been cross- Examined, but not on any new matter, without the enquiry authority.

Also Read- Home Secretary Vs. Central Administrative Tribunal

If it appears necessary before the close of the case, the Presenting officer may, in its discretion, allow the inquiry to produce evidence not included in the list given to the service. 8(17) When the case for the disciplinary authority is closed, the member of the Service shall be required to state his defence, orally or in writing, as he may prefer. 8(18) The evidence on behalf of the members of the Services shall then be produced. The member of Service may examine himself in his own behalf if he so prefers. 8 (19) The inquiring authority may hear the Presenting Officer, if any, appointed, and the member. of the service. 8(22)(b) The Central Government may act on the evidence on the record or may, if it is of the opinion that further examination of any of the witness is necessary in the interest of justice, recall the witness. If the Central Government do not find justification for imposing one of the penalties specified in clauses (vii) to (ix) of rule 6 in a case referred to it by a State Government, then it shall refer it back to the State Government. 8(24)(i) After the conclusion of the inquiry, a report shall be prepared.

Also Read- SUKHJIT SINGH BAINS v. D/O PERSONNEL & TRAINING

Findings of Court

The court held that, Considering the short prayer of the applicant, as noticed above, the authority to whom representation has been forwarded is directed to decide the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order expeditiously but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Order so passed be duly communicated to the applicant. If applicant is found to be entitled to then benefit be released in his favour within a month thereafter.