Central Board Of Trustees & ORS. v. Ram Sagar Roy

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3032/2026 & CM APPL. 14582/2026, CM APPL. 14583/2026 CENTRAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES & ORS......Petitioners Through:

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Standing Counsel for EPFO along with Mr.

Yash Narain & Mr.

Gaurav, Advs.

versus RAM SAGAR ROY .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Rajmangal Kumar & Mr.

Avinash Singh, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 19.03.2026 1.

The present Writ Petition is filed assailing the correctness of the order dated 07.11.2025 (hereafter 'impugned order') passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 713/2025. 2.

The Respondent retired as Upper Divisional Clerk on 30.06.2024. He filed the subject OA seeking issuance of directions to the Petitioners to grant gratuity, commutation of superannuation pension, leave encashment, LTC adjustment bill and other benefits. 3.

The learned Tribunal, by the impugned order, after noticing that on that day neither any disciplinary proceeding nor any criminal case was pending against the Respondent, directed the Petitioners to release all retiral benefits along with simple interest at applicable GPF rates for the period of delay of each of the retiral benefits. The correctness The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/03/2026 at 13:46:47

of the same has been challenged before this Court. 4.

Learned counsel representing the Petitioners admits that in the disciplinary proceedings, the Respondent was awarded a minor penalty of Censure on 21.06.2024 before the Respondent retired. 5.

The disciplinary authority also found that there was no mala fide intent or ulterior motive on the part of the Respondent. 6.

Learned counsel representing the Petitioners submits that the CBI has been issuing summons for Respondent's appearance but he has not been appearing.

7.

On a Court question, learned counsel representing the Petitioners is unable to draw the attention of the Court to any case registered against the Respondent or a case where the Respondent has been named as an accused.

8.

The pendency of the inquiry by the Central Bureau of Investigation to investigate a criminal case in which the Respondent is not named as accused cannot be a ground to withhold pensionary benefits.

9.

Hence, no ground is made out to interfere with the impugned order.

10.

The present Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications also stand disposed of.

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J AMIT MAHAJAN, J MARCH 19, 2026 "SS"

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/03/2026 at 13:46:47