Judgment:
M.L. Chauhan, J.
1. The applicant has filed the present OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs:
“1. To quash and set-aside the impugned orders dated 29-10-2009 (Communicated with letter dated 9-11-09) and order dated 11-12-2009 (Ann.A-1 to A-3)
2. To direct the Respondents for refund of the amount recovered of 2% cut in pension for one year in one time from pension under the impugned order, with penal interest.
3. To grant all consequential benefits to treat the period of suspension as period spent on duty for all purposes and payments of interests at the GPF rates on the amounts of D.C.R. Gratuity and Leave encashment paid belatedly on 29-11-10 and 16-6-11 respectively on account of pendency of this case, as if the impugned orders had not been issued.
4. To grant any other relief as this Hon’ble Tribunal deem fit in the interest of justice, and
5. To award costs of this application.”
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the applicant while working as DEO (G) was initially placed under suspension vide order dated 16.7.2008, which order was subsequently revoked on 23.10.2008 followed by the charge sheet under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 dated 10.9.2008. The applicant retired from service on superannuation on 31.10.2008, as such the departmental proceedings were continued against the applicant after retirement in terms of Rule 9 (2) (a) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. The applicant was found guilty of the charge and subsequently impugned order dated 29.10.2009 was passed by the disciplinary authority whereby a penalty of 2% cut in pension for one year was imposed upon the applicant.
3. Against the said order dated 29.10.2009, the applicant filed petition dated 15.2.2010. Since no action was taken on the appeal/representation of the applicant, he subsequently filed the present OA on 4.7.2011 for the aforesaid reliefs.
4. Notice of this application was given to the respondents. However, only respondent No.2, New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC), have filed their reply. By way of preliminary objections, respondent No.2 have submitted that since the applicant had submitted the petition dated 15.2.2010 to the Lt. Governor, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, they cannot initiate parallel proceeding for quashing the proceedings, which is contrary to the legislative intent of the NDMC Act, 1994 and the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Further, respondent No.2 have also justified their action on merits.
5. The applicant has filed rejoinder affidavit, thereby reiterating the submissions made in the OA.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. During the pendency of this OA, respondent No.2 have placed on record the order dated 21.3.2012 and note dated 2.11.2011 whereby the appeal of the applicant has been accepted and impugned order dated 2.11.2011 has been set aside. Copies of both the order as well as note are taken on record.
7. Further, as can be seen from the note of the Lt. Governor dated 2.11.2011, it is clear that the order dated 9.11.2011 passed by the Chairman, NDMC has been set aside on the ground of lack of jurisdiction and the matter has been further remitted to the disciplinary authority to submit the report regarding its findings to the NDMC for an appropriate view in the matter.
8. In view of what has been stated above, we are of the view that the present OA does not survive at this stage, as the impugned order dated 9.11.2009 has been set aside by the appellate authority and the matter has been remitted back to the NDMC, which has been vested with the powers to pass orders regarding cut in pension in respect of Class I and Class II superannuated officers of the Council. Needless to add that in case the applicant has any grievance regarding the order to be passed by the NDMC, which is the competent authority to pass order regarding cut in pension in respect of Class I and Class II superannuated officers of the Council, like the applicant, it will be open for him to agitate the matter at that stage.
9. With this, the OA shall stand disposed of with no order as to costs.