Union of India and 2 Others v. Munna Singh
Case brief
What is this about?
Writ petition by Union of India challenging Central Administrative Tribunal order allowing gratuity release during pending criminal cases. Court held under Rule 69(1)(c) of CCS (Pension) Rules, gratuity is withheld pending conclusion of judicial/criminal proceedings unless specific minor penalties apply.
What did the court decide?
CA/T order quashing withholding of M.A.C.P. partially set aside; direction to consider M.A.C.P. claim; gratuity withholding upheld pending trial.
What the court decided
Court No. - 29
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 62309 of 2017
Petitioner :- Union Of India And 2 Others Respondent :- Munna Singh Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjeev Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Ashok Kumar Singh,Vinod Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
This writ petition has been filed by the Union of India and its instrumentalities being aggrieved by the order dated 15.09.17 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench at Allahabad in Original Application No. 240 of 2014 (Munna Singh vs. Union of India and Others) whereby learned Tribunal has allowed the original application filed by Munna Singh quashing the impugned orders/letters dated 17.10.2012, 03.12.2012 and 02.04.2013 vide which the petitioner was denied the benefit of M.A.C.P. as well as gratuity and commutation of pension due to pendency of criminal cases against him.
The case of the petitioner before the Tribunal was that the petitioner was appointed as Fire Engine Driver, Grade-II in the year 1978 and was permitted to seek voluntary retirement with effect from 23.07.2011.
The petitioner on the date of the voluntary retirement has completed 32 years, 10 months and 10 days of service but the petitioner was denied payment of gratuity totalling Rs. 3,15,351/- and commutation of pension to the extent of Rs. 2,60,452/-.
The petitioner further claims that his pension has been wrongly fixed treating his grade pay to be Rs. 2,400/- whereas if the M.A.C.P. would have been allowed then he would have been entitled to a grade pay of Rs. 4,200/-.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a government servant entitled to gratuity can claim it during the pendency of criminal cases against him.
Whether Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 applies to a public servant governed by Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972.
Whether withholding of gratuity is justified when criminal proceedings have been instituted against the employee.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Union Of India
- respondent
Munna Singh
Coram
Pankaj Mithal
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- WRIA/62309/2017
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court