D SRINIVAS RAO (M) , vs M/O HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (M) ,

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH OA/21/363/2020 HYDERABAD, this the 22nd day of July, 2020 Hon’ble Mr.

Ashish Kalia, Judl.

Member Hon’ble Mr.

B.V.

Sudhakar, Admn.

Member D.

Srinivas Rao, Gr.B S/o.

Late Sri D.

Suryanarayana Sastry, Aged about 60 years, Occ: Deputy Assistant Director General (Retd.), O/o.

The Government Medical Stores Depot, Behind ESI Hospital, S.R Nagar Post, Hyderabad – 500 038. ...

Applicant (By Advocate: Mr.

K.

Phani Raju) Vs.

1.

The Union of India rep. by The Secretary, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 011.

2.

The Director General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi- 110 011.

3.

The Deputy Director General, Directorate General of Health Services, Medical Stores Organization, West Block-1, Wing No.-6, R.K.

Puram, New Delhi – 110 066.

4.

Dy Director and In Charge, O/o. the Government Medical Stores Depot, Behind ESI Hospital, S.R Nagar Post, Hyderabad – 500 038. ...

Respondents (By Advocate: Mrs.

Rajitha, Sr.

CGSC) OA/21/363/2020 Page 2 of 3 O R D E R (ORAL) Hon’ble Mr.

Member 2.

The O.A. has been filed, aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not releasing the pensionary benefits to the applicant, though six months have lapsed since he retired.

The brief facts of the case are that the applicant retired from the respondent’s organization as the Deputy Assistant Director General on 31.12.2019.

However, his pensionery benefits have not been released till date.

The contention of the applicant is that he has submitted the pension papers much earlier to his retirement.

Even after such submission, the vigilance clearance certificate has not been issued by the competent authority.

There is no disciplinary case pending against him and therefore, there could be no reason for the delay in release of the pension.

More than six months time lapsed and yet, his pension has not been released. released.

The applicant claims that non-release of pension is against law, arbitrary and against rules.

5.

Heard Sri K.

Phani Raju, learned counsel for the applicant and Smt.

Rajitha, learned counsel for the respondents, and perused the pleadings on record.

6.

The applicant has retired from the respondent’s organization on 31.12.2019.

He has submitted the pensionery papers, as are required by the respondent’s organization.

He states that his pensionery papers could not be processed because of vigilance certificate to be issued by the concerned OA/21/363/2020 Page 3 of 3 authority.

The grievance of the applicant is that more than six months have lapsed since his retirement and yet, pensionery benefits have not been released.

It is not out of place to state that the Government of India lays great emphasis on processing of pensionery papers as early as possible.

The applicant claims that he has provided all the papers and that there is no disciplinary case pending against him.

7.

In view of the above, it is appropriate and fair to direct the respondents to consider the O.A. as a representation and examine the relief sought based on the grounds stated in the O.A., for release of pension.

After such an examination, the respondents are directed to issue a speaking and reasoned order, within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

With the above direction, the O.A. is disposed.

No order as to costs. (B.V.

SUDHAKAR) (ASHISH KALIA) MEMBER (ADMN.) MEMBER(JUDL.) /pv/