MCD Retiree Without Pension Since 2016 Gets CAT Order To Process Retiral Dues With GPF-Rate Interest After Service Verification

The applicant served in the Central Secretariat Service and joined the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) on deputation in September 2001.

He was permanently absorbed in the MCD in November 2003 after the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) issued a no-objection certificate conditional on his technical resignation from Central Government service.

Following his suspension and the termination of his deputation and absorption, he challenged those actions before the Tribunal.

In 2010, the Tribunal set aside the suspension review orders and held that he was deemed to have remained in service with entitlement to back wages; the Delhi High Court dismissed the respondents’ challenge in 2022.

The applicant retired from the MCD on 30 April 2016 but had not received pension or other retirement benefits.

The MCD said processing required verification of his earlier service and access to his service book, which it stated had been taken over by the CBI.

He sought release of his retirement benefits and interest on the arrears.

The Tribunal proceeded under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, under which the applicant invoked its jurisdiction.

It referred to Regulation 5(2) of the DMC Services (Control & Appeal) Regulations, 1959 in connection with the MCD’s assertion that the service book had been taken over by the CBI.

On delayed retirement benefits, it relied on State of Jharkhand v. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava, (2013) 12 SCC 210, and S.K. Dua v. State of Haryana, (2008) 3 SCC 44, for the principles that pensionary benefits are earned and not a bounty, and that interest may be claimed for their unjustified delay; it also considered Ram Kishan v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 9767/2015, and Dr. Ajit Kumar Goyal v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, W.P.(C) Nos. 1114/2025 and 1160/2025.

The Tribunal found that the MCD had not established that the service book remained in the CBI’s custody, and treated recovery or reconstruction of the record as an administrative step that should not indefinitely prevent consideration of the applicant’s retirement benefits.

It directed the MCD to approach the CBI for the original service book or, if it remained necessary for an investigation, for permission to prepare an authenticated shadow service book. The record was then to be used for verification of the applicant’s MHA service.

Given the finality of the earlier order restoring his service status, and the absence of any matter shown to disentitle him to benefits, the Tribunal held that he was entitled to retirement dues.

It further held that the delay was not shown to be attributable to the applicant and, applying the cited authorities, found interest payable from the date the benefits fell due until payment.

The MCD was directed to approach the CBI for the original service book or an authenticated shadow service book if the original remained necessary for investigation.

The service record was to be provided for MHA service verification, which the MHA was directed to complete within 15 days of receiving the request.

After receiving verification, the MCD was to consider payment of provisional or final retirement benefits within four weeks.

The respondents were also directed to pay simple interest at the applicable GPF rate on the delayed benefits, from the date they became due until actual payment.

No order as to costs was made.