Pending Rule 16 minor-penalty proceedings cannot justify withholding post-retiral pension or gratuity.

The applicant, a retired Section Supervisor of the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO), was appointed as a Clerk on 10 October 1983 and retired on attaining superannuation on 30 November 2021.

Five days before retirement, he was served with a charge memorandum dated 25 November 2021 alleging negligence, non-performance of duties and disobedience of official orders. The proceedings were initiated under Rule 16 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, relating to minor penalties.

The applicant contended that, owing to the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, his remaining post-retiral benefits were withheld despite his submission of pension papers and representations dated 23 February 2024 and 20 September 2024.

The respondents stated that the applicant had received Staff Provident Fund dues of Rs.48,94,045/-, provisional pension of Rs.51,500 per month, and interim gratuity, commutation and leave encashment, while the remaining amounts were withheld under the applicable pension rules pending conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings.

Whether disciplinary proceedings initiated under Rule 16 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and continued after the applicant’s retirement could be relied upon to withhold his pension and gratuity?

Whether the applicant was entitled to release of the remaining admissible post-retiral benefits despite the pendency of the minor-penalty proceedings?

The Tribunal applied Rule 8(1) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, which permits withholding or withdrawal of pension or gratuity where a pensioner is found guilty of grave misconduct or negligence in departmental or judicial proceedings.

However, Rule 8(2)(b) specifically provides that departmental proceedings instituted under Rule 16 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 while the government servant was in service, and continued after retirement, shall have no effect on the pension and gratuity of the pensioner.

The respondents also relied upon the corresponding provisions of Rule 9(2)(a) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, concerning continuation of departmental proceedings after retirement.

The Tribunal found that the charge memorandum had been issued before retirement but that the proceedings were admittedly under Rule 16 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and therefore concerned a minor penalty.

Although such proceedings could continue, Rule 8(2)(b) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 expressly excluded any effect of those proceedings on the applicant’s pension and gratuity.

Consequently, the respondents could not indefinitely withhold the applicant’s lawful retiral benefits merely because the proceedings remained pending.

The disciplinary proceedings, if otherwise legally maintainable, could be concluded independently, but they could not operate to prejudice the applicant’s pensionary entitlements.

The respondents were directed to release all remaining admissible post-retiral benefits, including the withheld gratuity and consequential dues, within three months from receipt of a certified copy of the order, in accordance with the rules.

The respondents were also directed to finalize the pending disciplinary proceedings, if still pending, expeditiously and in accordance with law.

There was no order as to costs, and all connected miscellaneous applications were disposed of.