CAT - ['Ernakulam']
Employment and Labour LawAdministrative and Public Law

Any due unpaid provisional pension must be paid within one month; delayed-payment interest may be separately claimed.

E GODFRED vs DEFENCE

CAT - ['Ernakulam']JUDGMENT: September 15, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Any due unpaid provisional pension must be paid within one month; delayed-payment interest may be separately claimed.. E GODFRED  vs DEFENCE. CAT - ['Ernakulam']. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant, a retired Ammunition Mechanic (HS-II) of the Naval Armament Depot, Aluva, instituted the Original Application concerning release of his pensionary benefits.

Source reference: no citation

During the hearing, he produced Pension Payment Order No. 835202301081 (Annexure A7). Pursuant thereto, an amount of ₹18,43,924 was disbursed to him on 17 August 2026, although the application stated the date as 17 June 2026.

Source reference: para. 1

The applicant stated that he was satisfied with receipt of that amount but contended that provisional pension of ₹34,760 for July 2026 remained unpaid. He also claimed interest on the delayed payment of pension and gratuity.

Source reference: para. 2
02

Issues

Whether the respondents should be directed to pay the applicant ₹34,760 towards provisional pension for July 2026, if the amount was due and remained unpaid.

Source reference: para. 3

Whether the applicant should be permitted to pursue his claim for interest on the delayed payment of pension and gratuity through a representation.

Source reference: para. 3
03

Law Applied

The Tribunal applied the principle that where pensionary dues are found to be payable, the competent authority must release the amount due within a reasonable period and in compliance with the applicable pension-sanction and payment orders.

Source reference: para. 3

It further applied the procedural principle that a claim for interest on delayed pensionary benefits may be considered by the competent authority upon a properly submitted representation, subject to a reasoned decision within a prescribed time.

Source reference: para. 3
04

Reasoning

The Tribunal recorded that the applicant had received ₹18,43,924 pursuant to the Pension Payment Order and therefore treated that aspect of the grievance as substantially resolved.

Source reference: para. 1

However, since the applicant continued to claim ₹34,760 as provisional pension for July 2026, the Tribunal directed payment of that amount if it was legally due and had not already been disbursed.

Source reference: paras. 2–3

In relation to interest, instead of adjudicating the claim directly, the Tribunal granted the applicant liberty to submit a representation, leaving the initial determination to the competent authority.

Source reference: paras. 2–3
05

Holding

The Tribunal recorded receipt of ₹18,43,924 and directed the respondents to pay ₹34,760 towards provisional pension for July 2026, if due and unpaid, within one month from 15 September 2026.

The applicant was permitted to submit a representation claiming interest on the delayed pension and gratuity within one month. If such representation was filed, the competent authority was directed to pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible and, in any event, within two months of its receipt.

Source reference: para. 3

The Original Application was closed.

Source reference: para. 3

No order as to costs was made.

Source reference: no citation
CAT - ['Ernakulam']

Original Court PDF

E GODFREDvsDEFENCE

CAT - ['Ernakulam'] · September 15, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment