Dr. a. K. Singh v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC10 Dec 2025W.P.(C)/9710/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interest on delayed retiral benefits; DCRG; Leave Encashment; GPF; CGEGIS; retirement 31.07.2010; benefits released 2020-21; departmental inquiry exoneration; charge sheet dropped 18.07.2011 and 24.04.2014; enquiry report 27.02.2018; case closed 02.05.2019; criminal charges dropped; 6% per annum interest; payment within six weeks; Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench; O.A. No. 1794/2024; W.P.(C) 9710/2025; High Court of Delhi; Navin Chawla J.; Madhu Jain J.; disposed 10.12.2025.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to pay interest at 6% per annum on the delayed retiral benefits from the dates they became due till actual payment; payment to be made within six weeks. ¶¶28

Dr. a. K. Singh Vs Union of India & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~25

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Date of decision:10.12.2025

¶4

W.P.(C) 9710/2025 DR. A. K. SINGH .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Mukesh Kumar Gupta, Mr. Rajendra Khatter and Dr. R. Jayah, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Vivekanand Mishra, SPC for R1 and R2 Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, Mr. Mainsh Kumar Singh and Mr. Vasu Agarwal, Advs. for UPSC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

¶10

NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)

¶11

This petition has been filed challenging the Order dated 28.05.2025 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in O.A. No. 1794/2024, titled ‘ Dr. A.K Singh v. UOI & Ors.’, only to a limited extent that the learned Tribunal did not pass any direction for payment of interest on the delayed payment of the retiral benefits, specifically the Leave Encashment and the Death-Cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG) in favour of the petitioner and against the respondent.

¶12

Signature Not Verified

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

Signed By:RENUKA W.P.(C) 9710/2025 NEGI Signing Da te:1 6.12.2025 20:10:45

¶15

The learned Tribunal has kept this claim of the petitioner open.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had retired on 31.07.2010. While the amounts towards GPF and CGEGIS were released to the petitioner, the Leave Encashment, DCRG and other retiral benefits, including the pay for the period from 01.10.2000 to 31.07.2010 were released to the petitioner only in 202021, that is, with a considerable delay.

¶17

He further submits that there is no reason given by the learned Tribunal for not awarding interest on these delayed payments.

¶18

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that he has no instructions on the matter. 6. We have already granted sufficient time to the respondents to file their counter affidavit. Notice on the petition was issued and accepted by the respondent on 14.07.2025. Further time to file counter affidavit was also granted to the respondents on 01.09.2025. We are, therefore, not inclined to grant further time to the respondents to file their reply.

¶19

From the above, it is evident that though the petitioner had retired on 31.07.2010, certain portions of his retiral benefits were released to him only in 2020-21. The petitioner was facing a departmental inquiry at the time of his retirement, of which he was fully exonerated, and the charge sheet was dropped vide Orders dated 18.07.2011 and 24.04.2014.

¶20

Another enquiry against the petitioner was concluded with the enquiry report dated 27.02.2018, wherein it was held that the charges had not been proved against the petitioner. The same was accepted

¶21

Signature Not Verified

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

Signed By:RENUKA W.P.(C) 9710/2025 NEGI Signing Da te:1 6.12.2025 20:10:45

¶24

and the case against the petitioner was closed vide Order dated 02.05.2019.

¶25

The criminal charges against the petitioner were also dropped. Therefore, the petitioner was entitled to the full amount of the retiral benefits, which have been released to him with a delay.

¶26

In our view, the learned Tribunal has erred in not awarding interest on the said amount. Accordingly, we direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum to the petitioner for the delayed payments from the date that they became due to the petitioner till the date of the actual payment.

¶27