Facts
The applicant, Syed Dilshad Hussain, retired as Chief Typist on August 31, 2019.
Source reference: no citationThe respondents withheld his DCRG (Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity) and leave salary due to a money suit (No. 285/2019) filed against him by a private individual.
Source reference: p.2This money suit was subsequently dismissed for default by the Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), 3rd Court, Alipore, on June 9, 2025.
Source reference: p.2Following the dismissal of the suit, the applicant made a representation to the authorities on November 27/28, 2025, requesting the release of his retirement benefits, DCRG, and leave salary, which remained pending.
Source reference: p.2Issues
1. Whether the respondents should be directed to consider the applicant's representation dated 27.11.2025 for retirement benefits, DCRG, and leave salary.
Source reference: p.22. Whether the respondents should be directed to make delayed payment of retirement benefits with 12% interest.
Source reference: p.23. Whether the respondents should be directed to make payment of DCRG and leave salary within a stipulated period since no judicial or disciplinary proceedings are pending against the applicant.
Source reference: p.2-3Law Applied
The Tribunal primarily applied Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which grants it jurisdiction to hear and decide applications from persons aggrieved by orders pertaining to their service matters.
Source reference: p.1The implicit legal principle applied is that of prompt payment of retirement benefits when there are no outstanding legal grounds for withholding them.
Source reference: no citationReasoning
The court heard both parties and reviewed the materials on record.
Source reference: p.2The applicant's counsel clarified that the purpose of the application would be served if the authority were directed to pay the DCRG and leave salary within a specific timeframe, as the initial reason for withholding these benefits (a money suit) had been dismissed for default.
Source reference: p.2The Judicial Member observed that since the money suit had been dismissed and "nothing has been left to make the payment of DCRG and Leave salary to the applicant", and no judicial or disciplinary proceedings were pending against the applicant, there was no longer a valid ground for the respondents to withhold the DCRG and leave salary.
Source reference: p.2-3This directly addressed the first and third issues by determining that the basis for withholding benefits was removed.
Source reference: no citationHolding
The Tribunal directed the respondents to make payment of DCRG and leave salary to the applicant within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
The O.A. was disposed of at the admission stage.
Source reference: p.3There was no specific order regarding the 12% interest on delayed payment, as the primary direction was for the release of the withheld amounts.
Source reference: no citationOriginal Court PDF
Syed Dilshad Hussain v. Union of India and Others [O.A. 350/147/2026]
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in