w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Mohd. Nasarullah Khan v/s The Union of India Represented by the Secretary to the Govt. of India Ministry of Communication & Information Technology Department of Telecommunications Sanchar Bhawan, & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LTD [Active] CIN = U74140DL1992PLC048211

Company & Directors' Information:- THE INDIA COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999TN1919PTC000911

Company & Directors' Information:- L H TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74900JK2009PTC003032

Company & Directors' Information:- INDIA CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U65990MH1941PTC003461

Company & Directors' Information:- C H C INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72200WB2001PLC093126

Company & Directors' Information:- V R INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72900MH2000PTC128632

Company & Directors' Information:- K. K. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72200OR2009PTC011100

Company & Directors' Information:- S A I S INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U72100TN2010PTC075284

Company & Directors' Information:- V & D TELECOMMUNICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U64200MH2008PTC179961

Company & Directors' Information:- S H INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U72200DL2005PTC135610

Company & Directors' Information:- V G TELECOMMUNICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U64202DL2005PTC138929

    Original Application No. 040/00122 of 2015

    Decided On, 22 April 2015

    At, Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati

    By, THE HONOURABLE MRS. MANJULA DAS
    By, JUDICIAL MEMBER & THE HONOURABLE MR. MOHD. HALEEM KHAN
    By, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

    For the Applicant: S.K. Sikidar, Advocate. For the Respondents: M. Bhattacharjee, Advocate.



Judgment Text

Order (Oral)

Manjula Das, Judicial Member:

1. By this O.A., applicant makes a prayer for setting aside the impugned show cause Memorandum dated 06.01.2015 whereby imposed 100% pension cut on permanent basis and also for setting aside the show cause Memorandum dated 13.01.2015 and 15.01.2015 respectively.

2. Mr. S.K. Sikidar, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was the employee of the respondent department. It was further submitted by learned counsel that applicant was retired on superannuation in the year 2011 and applicant was getting provisional pension since then.

3. Learned counsel submitted that a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the applicant. Simultaneously, CBI case was also filed against the applicant where the Special Judge, CBI, Chandmari, Guwahati vide order dated 02.09.2013 convicted the applicant.

4. According to learned counsel, the disciplinary proceeding was also completed and applicant was imposed penalty. But, subsequently, that had been withdrawn by the respondent authority due to the order passed by the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court. However, suddenly, a Memorandum dated 06.01.2015 was issued by the Under Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Communications & IT, Department of Communications wherein the department proposed to impose 100% pension cut on permanent basis against the applicant. By the said order, further, applicant was directed to make representation before the appropriate authority within fifteen days.

5. Mr. Sikidar further submitted that applicant did make representation against the said show cause notice on 04.03.2015 by ventilating his grievances against the 100% pension cut. According to learned counsel, said representation is still pending with the authority and not yet taken any decision.

6. Learned counsel vehemently argued that one side, the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court has already seized the conviction vide order dated 30.10.2013 in Cri.M.C. 853/2013 arising out of Cri.A.333/2013. Another side, for the retired person, the department authority has no right to withhold the pension without approval of President of India. But, in the present case, no such approval obtained by the department before passing any order. Thus, the department exceeded the power which is not as per law and the impugned order ought to be set aside.

7. Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the show cause notice dated 06.01.2015 is only proposed to make an action for cutting pension of 100%.

Learned counsel further submitted that she is unable to reply as to whether the said order has been implemented or not. To that effect, learned counsel accordingly, prays some time to take instruction from the department.

8. By countering the argument advanced by learned counsel for the respondents, Mr. S.K. Sikidar, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that by now, the respondent authority has implemented the aforesaid order by cutting 100% pension which is very much appeared in the Bank Account wherein ‘NIL’ pension amount has been shown.

9. We have heard the rival submission, perused the pleadings and material placed before us. From the impugned order dated 06.01.2015, it appears that the respondent authority proposed to impose 100% pension cut on permanent basis but no whisper as to whether, if any, approval of the President of India. Thus, the order shows that no such approval of the President of India has been obtained.

Further it is also noted that applicant did make appeal/representation before the respondent authority on 04.03.2015 in regards to impugned show cause notice dated 06.01.2015..

10. By Taking into consideration the entire conspectus of the case, we feel that let justice be done by directing the respondent authority to dispose of the representation dated 04.03.2015 apropos the show cause notice dated 06.01.2015. Accordingly, we direct the respondent authority to dispose of the representation dated 04.03.2015 within a period of four mo

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

nths from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the decision so arrived by the respondent authority shall be communicated to the applicant forthwith. Till the decision to be arrived by the respondent authority, no such 100% pension cut shall be implemented and the applicant be allowed to get the provisional pension. 11. O.A. stands disposed of accordingly at the admission stage. There shall be no order as to costs.
O R