raised later, if and when the occasion arises. However, it is to be noted that when the O.A. was pending, interim stay of disciplinary proceedings was sought for; which however was not granted. But, referring to the flimsy nature of the charge involved and the scope of penalty, if at all any, the petitioner moved the Tribunal for causing disbursement of the gratuity referring to the marriage of his daughter proposed to be conducted in a shortwhile. The claim was resisted by the Department referring to Rule 69 of the CCA (Pension) Rules to the effect that gratuity cannot be released unless the enquiry is completed. But, the Tribunal as per Ext. P7 order found that the charge memo indicated that the charges were not serious so as to warrant withholding of gratuity and it even did not disclose any grave misconduct. Considering the fact that the applicant has already retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2013, 50% of the gratuity was ordered to be released immediately. Being aggrieved of the said order, the Department filed Review Application No.180 of 2015, wherein scope of Rule 69 of the CCA (Pension) Rules was highlighted. It was also pointed out that the Rule is mandatory by using the expression 'shall' - that no gratuity shall be paid until conclusion of the departmental proceedings and issue of final orders thereon .
