Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
N Mahalingam vs D/O Post on 11 March, 2020
a i QA T6 of VOLS ed CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MADRAS BENCH QABIO GG FQ 2018 AAS oe he Dated b ng hej] day of March, 2020 ~ PRESENT Hon'ble Mr. TJacob, Member (A) N.Mahalingam, S/o Narayanan, No ANOV137, Sankaran kudisdrunoy, Santhankulam -- 628 764 o Applicant (By Advocate M/S SB. Ramaswanivrajarajan) Ys ie Union 'of indis, Rep by The Chief Postmaster General, Tamil Nade Cirels, Chennai -- 600 002.
a. The superintendent of Post OMces, Tetieorin Division, Patioorin O28 OOF. .. Respondents £ ° (By Advocate Mr & Rajendran} Be eee Be ofan = bag.
pn, (Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. T. Jacoh, Member (A) oe The applicant has filed this QA under Section [8 of the Administrative as Tubunals Act, 1983 seeking the following 2 'To direct the respondent to bring the applicant under Old Pension Scheme liking into account the year af Re ta the Postman Cadre Le. wacanoy vear 2003) un grant retirement / pensicziery benefits and a pp direct & ie oe 1D refun at the entire amount pone % 4S S2enen further ar ather arde TS a8 this Horie ¥ & eem J and proper in the circumstances of eta ;
s Extra Departmental Branch Postmaster, Chow GDS MD/MC), was appomted gs Postman on coming out succeasfal in the arimental Examination in the year 2iNM for the vacancy of the year 2002 and consequently he was lyvnight under New Pension Scheme taking ints account the date of actual appointment instead of the year of vacancy thar arose in 2002.
\garieved on that, he made representation to the 2" respondent requesting to bring hum under Old Pensing Scheme taking into account the year of veoaney Le 2002 as tne delay was caused by the Department te conduct the examination in un appropriate time, Bur, the 2°. respondent had passed the impugned order rejec:
the applicant, Agereved by the sbove, the applicant has "led this OA sealing the @ relefS, iter-alia, on the tah RS Sowing grands + "i. The ¢ espondents ought to have considered ihe case of the
2 a applicant ander Old Pension Acheme taking bite account the year 3 x x of vacancy be. 2002 because, he had appeared im the Departmental Eeamination soanducted for the prranetii to Me cadre of Poatrnan to 1 up the vacancies arisen in the year 2002 ami the applicant was oramoted from the post of EDBPM (GDSBPM) to the cadre of Postman on coming oat as auccesstil og candidate under 260 quota an merit basis.
a The Department augit im heave budsted the recruiiment ty the Seances caused dar the cadre re f Postman in the g % e e oe gs ie year 2002. Bot, the mspondents had delayed the recruitment process lar thelr own convenionta, without any justified reason.
Due to the inaction of the respondents in Glling ups the vacancies 4 arisen mi the year 2008, the apelicant wae brawht under the New Pension Scheme depriving him to get benefit under Old Pension = Scheme. [ihe reson the cadre af Postmen in an appropriate time ic, in the year 2002 ulself, the applicant would have come under Old Pension Scheme, Thus teking sodvantise of thar own Gani tn deny ae benefit ander Old Persian is vand arblirare" & 3 ; 43 5 z set, eet the 3 : - yon one res bce epee ar 54 on x a ZB : we eg Oo 86 @ oh "Ee wy 8 i -& 2 tp 3 vane fe a 2 'ott s 5 % en 2 of aoe ES, 2 os 5 @ m oe gS & ie pa 'yey ee w oth 8 3 4 ; imeh 8S % tg ie Pa eo. Oe fs, ee i eo $s ¢ % ' re Se .
ee a Pe 3 bs ee Pol ss Sy Pe oS ta xa te , Bo SS so ad fs ' ths. om 4 arm. mS ia a yon ay yo, ee : aad 2 "ek 'doe oR we LE ioaees cK secrete " wa Peds oe ee feet a 5% a AS a 4 oy: coat 3 ee ee s:
te a See Kos , 5S e, + me & & oes z 2 ae = : he ey nibs BS 2 f: on eee: i to ot She phe "pr os oS "aye £3 x an at et ne $5003 ee'y sect on. PR a t eet nee eat ae en a poe Ors 23 Jes ia a HO g 0h "a oh: a feo: fg 3 Seat os ree Soe ee we ae °4, nye Co co oF : wee Ee on oe. Todt % eat ex of fal ee Sg z hese ee ; Ed. Sea besa % Ga bow wa ee ba Sy de 2 a % OOF oo Ck , : ES oe Me Ch £ Ss 4 ger Lage BS Same * Be " "o ae ete: te Q ag a " oe Zs ae £3 spt ees a fe Brees . oy 3 oe SS pes o oe on wee iy pe bey ay 2 as age g eo BE: eo 8 Bs me a Pee a eee, w z pod yr, Oy: Sina H See ; wy. hah, 3 nk: % os of. Be oS a peat oe Boe e ay ae Bi 4 WEE bes = 4; a 2, os Hy we ee oF oy Py Be % ays B Se Le FR 4 Sy fan id we ; "e ay oa :
4 1B 3 ae & ae oe on 2 oO g + oe 'eA 3 f, we peeee: ay jen Jee od pee. we £3: %, eet. 3 y poe Be. aa yee ene. rok: as 5 SS ee.
; howe poet Pe 44 oy i a Ay r Ye z 'Seo Lm ay oS Lo Be ee 23 ' satis . Be. 4 ue Lo a t bent - oe ee bee " S e ye a
5) Date wae oh: a ike a8 oe 2 i ee whe cme Ba ty eee a, ie ome * i ie bey ae te feo} oe oD agen eee teas a fe ad Ch oe na? at Go : as 603 Sn heat oo Ue es Soe : Sow:
yon oe not x Fo tee Esacs eh 53 iG ay oe a3 he Si 4 Ps a3 x2 wg wy ben oe Rad a ws Ht oy ie boa Ea me "gS Pe ee 2% 2 Bp 8 2 rd y . a a Past 4 a ee Sas th: By ae "Sy aes - i a 5c oh a boot aa fy tf% a os es e cK oe £5, pet rs oes aay. gre: ; fi 'it $069 Be Se fF oe 43 wom a5 tnd . cong Bae, et e "tl paee ae e a or Hor Le os i : we BS "s Bo Be ee : me a he ae . c a % Ls " Sex , pe oe ge 5200 By. Son So: pats ae Coe. xe Le pee whee Reiko 00 oe A "eg ' ve a9 & e oe ee ~ a og ae zg <A oe ae * a a os 3 ee %e ' ay gee eee 2 ee Je ° Fe : ae ee oan tee he os Pee fo Bi oS Bed ao y " a re tS Sek : Fe d ne ay eee rie os Te Ne fey oe tek nee SS oe wae x wre, oe A: ees: ge See Pe on 7 shee me 5 ZS ee ay aoe. Se a Be 1S £S Lo 'nA Oe ee aa . ee -
we 4 x hee: oye ee: ; gee Raed ss ny, toe Je ond wh 2h we? ten S Seok a cA fa +e 34 ge "% ts 3 Ts ee Se 2 om Seat aa ei fe aft ia Esse eg He £5 ox : : : Mee we v3 pee. aad ' Bx wee. 'af wae wr, Baeers Des eee 4S Tee pink ee Wwe re Se me 2 Tae: ee 4G 4 "s a seed ne AN, on, fa $ ry ie 'heh se * hoe & us a a * © & e a ey :
: Pa 2 fragt oo re La me x ny Todt ee th Gh sf oo BS Boo z a 3 = bt : vera : e5 on 5 " x : 2%.
os " So rg o ieee, 4a "e "aoe Sh aS % ey a : aS nee . us s ie a
5 ony: ae a a2. ie 2 ae ey we Kes es eee nat ey xe Cy re oa ae oS ok en ie sie ce Be oa ie % iy fee a o 3 ws ! x s fe ey oie be BS a es a Ms re yk oe z pas a % z oa 2g os is oe Gy 2. Neal e i & oe bo oo es 2D eh Be Zz 2 ft 5 : i es "0, yee & re ree isi Go Poa as Sona 23 re te Fs os fee £3 : ' eg i tow Cae i Stent Fe weer ao. yee: 'see a oe Sed gaa RS a ehh pee Scand pe Paah aS . Soe Ze. x Son Yay net 3 oes £3 ee oe: : . ee os ie aod a " vet eB o i eg # re So oe - ' eget se ey 2 pe fare, Py wane: ae Ree Soot ee ay es Z p00 neh, em A < "od.
os a eo "aes ; we ee th gon ve a oS 8 i "3 es pont et oe @ ff eS 4 #8 . os fe eS Bs ? uy ae oe oD ed os o 3s Lan ess " ae 2 :
wn on pe 5 a a os S g S a oe: pee ee fe ey oe on ae fod id ae £2 Le ' bs : oy von 2 :
opebe 4 ig we Bee. ee, at ere. we tt : eoeg po4 3 3 ny 4 peo} 4 oe eS 4 4 es (ae 3 Le is w ee ss ae wn t ee Be a be i ES EE ws ee oo a C24 ees eg z pe or y ' Banacerinnnes ee OA Fo oF SONS LA sy WS feeder cadre as far as Postman and other cadres ave concerned. The Degartmen! of Poste, ATS Rachuliment Rules clarif that Cramin Dek Sevaks are Rolders af iii! Baste. § cruitment Rides & .
Posts, fae they are outside the regular civil service due to which their appointment ¥ will be by direct recruitment even when selection is an basis of sel SChON-CU- seniority. It also preserihes thal on failing recruitment from Gramin Dak Sevaks, the earmarked vacancies will be Aled up ty direct reoruttimwent fram open cueket.
Similar provisions are exist thelr appointment in regular servies could be the criterion for determining their placement in CUS {Pension} Rules' New Pension Scheme. The GDS cannot be aid io be the feeder osdre for Postman' Gray D in view of provisions of Recruliment Roles. Hence the respondents pray for dismissal of the QA.
28, Learned counsel for the respandents relied on the following cltations in support of bis submigsisnys:
23 Vhe Heatble Supreme (oud in Civil Appeal No. 9) of 2015 is the case of. NaHthamel & Ors vs. Sounnva 8.1. & Ors Hy OLA, NOUISOMMR 245018 dated 36.10.2016 Emakulam Bench of the Toyasimhan & Ann Vs. Ol & Ors:
Tvhunal in the case GF ER.
reas When the matter came ap fr hearing, learned counsel for the respondents invited our attention to the istest decision of the Hane Supreme Court in Galen of india & Gre 6 Gandibe Behera in Ciel Appeal Ne. 84922019 arising owt af SLPS No, (36422014) dated OS 112079 and stated that the seid deciainn srniarely Syst An State me Sos ay ea d ns oS ve hs ig eg $5 on Ke oe ie BS zg & a es ee ae we oA eee dee ae Gov S past Ses ay ae na ta a # oe UE x es ty * ps aS < 1904, ae ey "at bags fi eo ne a ths agg we inte 43 a3 sane. - wae tet ; e Sac' Oe eo ee G a i Ses : 2 yy ; t3 43 2S ce = Se ma bee a oe fs e ee ee eh =. 2 & 2 FB am SS ee & ke 1 te a Bo BR ae 0 ote Be bee 'ct a ee gE EE age OH wpe Ra B i SS a 2 a Sy xt ep Kar ae ie zB Cg ay, ee Sy es fee 3 . <5 ee fog oe os ze era wD cy ae gS 5 st eB ory : & ¢ 8 £ & BoB 6 oO oe we ee a we Ss ae ey ie yA % wf ofS. 83 os a6 i, oS ee ; bee Be Gen op BE AS Gs Zn we oie ss see See : oe Be Meg ae ig aR oe oo hood, ie en SS ae we me '8 ee a} ot ve +e on Ch. be £ Ls, 'Seg eon eee sree np, oe nae a Po # wh oD sete: ne oe es yer ene ro oh ee oo ey % y Be Ea oe Ben a ied bo pt Be Se we Boe yee a pag ae oe oy aes baer oe ge bee er Sant £3 ah: as Loa oH 4 os vet peers we i Se ae get 2. a a> weeds . a SA ae ah 'axe we z Beet, tye z oe Sp is a ee % te, oe oy S ieee age BE get oon = a ee ee : Bp bs eas ee oe ne fete < ao wee a ; Ep deg tte, fat:
' m a Mast eA a ee ; tp pe Be ee es oS ed Go hk a Fe oe", 4 ay oS gk 2 oH ay : td oe ee oak ie 2 . ay sgn an bes ES hes ay z ce +s ie a o a % BS HR CS oe os ye Se G es Chg we ss os ; 4 rere £5 BF eh es ay. £5 od re oe Sy io x fen bea Be ahd Be were es tee nee ae, S Sods oe pee. Pen ety EE me we .
te ae per. ae teget oo "oe et ey oe ai oSct oe oo ho oy 2 Fi Pog ' Ba : toot a eee foe Set ay Ses Annes ' oe oe nee oe Eos Pou BS rot a : Ch ey "eae omy cA wee te 33 be Ge oe " pox ode 4 25 es te yt : oe oe 4 He: $e eb fe 4a 2 sate ter ee Bot 3 we &. Bea ion ea oe aa om ay 4 ae oe oe : a bei so Be Ye we Sn e bee z 23 me ne * Pret ae. ee Ly hen Z x8 3 By : Ap: ne eS CA 4 oe my oy oy me oe B 5 ood Las Gua bon. a wh ben os ; ene he S fe ". a Pe ges ey ne - wees, ay pot x S See seo tad 'nt ee es we + § wif a eS % ia. i oe ace: te $4 : $e SY a 3 oo e fae we oy os e oe 2 & Sede hey ee c% = : eg cee ee es a2 A mm a3 : pit hook ra hae. 4. * oe ee pee pet yk ae oe £ oe, ae eee ea "3 ai S en peed:
ee ee wan * robe - 5% 3 & 2 " Seg oA fos. Be cre oy en a 'a bed Te Dee po * ee an OG ey ia SE oe : a3 wn 8 Qos ee AS ae gen Ce ee ge a4 #2 fe ee: oe oy 3 wen Mee: fees xe te "ey pk he >. "sy re a : oF; $303 43 ey, ee ae Sas oy os i Ceoe eh, 52 bork yer 4 . wt ee.
Sa tees, ia pe "at oS ee oS % fee oo " : pee bee fe OE oc4 Pe % Sse nek we nen z on 5 2 3 or, es aS age 4 h Seo 43 3 fetes: £3 'oie tak "Bee: s ah as a ta, Bcd 2 oe oe #5. és et * oS £3, oe " net oes wn be pa He A 4 oe od hoa pot net Le : £84. By BE oe : xB Bag % we =: oe ae te aie oo Sy 33 y "j Sk cana ney Oy %Y Best ay meee " et 4 Be 5 : oe A : i ; at CS 2 Mee : 7 tek SE $4. sy jk "bee cod he a) a, at ay oe Baas we 9% pam ay y Saees wn oe Se po oy 28 ee ath een, oe; ged oe te wes oe Ly 34 a re ; 3 wa xe werk ythed ua "4 oy ge ae 6 yo ge eet a Ls nog eo.
" SF , 23 "a wey : eae. - % sore: ee. ea Stoo ee Bs See = ae rs oe ay at ee: foe % ame Pe ages od es we ee Ps ae os oY : ' t % os ae Re a & me Be ge @ 4 3 & & a @ ws £ " Sy ; oo WS 25 5 - iF OF, we: : / oe os ae tA G is B feat eee ma ay 2 feds £4 Si 2 See ree 007 a Say age eS pres, ce $3 ee Nanay et a £ tet a ou a ee ne 8 woe Bo eB CS g 8 we oy et os os x us e a i ee Fr tea ta a Oe ge 9. Bae aos BE fh oe whe toe ees Ee ap oe eke oe oS CE See Lt ist e ca 'et S * oe fy a poo BO a ® a it Bo BOO ye fet eet: ay a oe a Do Ngee gS es oe < ae aS ee Bt a eh 3 Bene: 2 ar eet: a oS So * os 2g as 2 ie Be ie ge B ee ae he, er a S65 4s Bo i ag aon Se £3 i ae, oS Bs LS se teat C3 Lo Saat a OA Th af 2058 services In regular employment. The other authority on which rellance has been placed on behalf of the respondents is a judgement of this Court delivered on T3" August, 2017 in the case of Habib Khan ov. State of Uttarakhand and Others{TOLS(DSLR TI46SC)} That case arose out of a similar dispute involving a work-charged employee of the State of Uttarakhand who warted his service In thal capacity counted for computing the qualifving service in regulur poet on the question of grant of pension. This judgment was alse delivered by a ty5- Jintge Bench of which Nan'ble Justice Ranjan Gogoi, before His Lordship agsumed the post of Chief Justice of India, was a member The aforesaid decision followed an earlier judgment of this Court delivered in the case of Panjab State Electricity Beard and Another vy, Nakara Singh and Another (2010) 4 SCCSIT). The latter case arse out of similar claims of work charged employees who were engaged in the Inigation and Power Department of the State of Puajah. The relevant provision of the Punieh Cid) Bervices Roles allowed temporary or officiating Aervice under the Stee Goverment without intermuption followed by confirmation in the same or another post te be counted in fall s as qualifying service but excluded the period af service in work charged establishment. The aforesaid Rule was struck down by the Full-Bench of the Puniab and Haryana High Court The decision af this Court in the case of Nakara Singh supra} was however founded on nwo cireulers which permitted epunting the period of service rendered by a work charged employes mi the Comral Government ar the State Goverrunent for
-
the purpose af computing penstonaty benefits as an employes of the Poniab State Electricity Board. The respondents in thes:
OA TE of SNS appeals also cannot bs held to be work-charged employees. The amid oategary of employees, Le. wer k-charged emplovess are engaged Against specific work and their pay and allowances are chargeable to such work. But the scope of respondents' work ae GDS wus part-time in nature. They bad the liberty to engave themactves in ather vocations, though the work they involved in = on earned an element of permanency, The fact a cae WeTE engaged se UDSs which constituied civil posts cannet bye implication teat thelr service having whole-time characteristic é¢ be an extension af thelr service rendered in the © Oapacity af GENSs. The subsequent service was guided by different service Riles os * having different employment characteristics. The selection of @ employee in regular post cannet also be pre-daied because af delay on the part of the authorities in holding the selection process. We do not agree with the view of the High Court an this on count In judgments which form subject of ae ny Chal Appeal Na. 3008 of ae SLPCCINOG. L676) af BUG, Cher Appeal Na, S379 of S016 and Civil Appeal No. 1G80] of 2016. Service tenure ofan ennployee In a particular post panmot be artificially extended an that manmier in the absence af any specific lngal provision.
16. In the case of Union of India & Oys, v the Registrar & supra), @ ples similar to that made by the GESs for tation of service in that capacity was speciiice NO anecific Rule or eves aicinisnatne oe 3 oS ao we ie 2 a om res 2 os ie "ty & pee 3 £3:
aa te & eo fe i te mu fon re rs te, & ede:
ont a respondents in this set of appeals. The only circ vata on which the respondents laid stteas on was the [99] circular which was considered in the case of Union of India &Ors. v. Registrar x .
ge Beane Amr (supra) As the post of GOS did not constitute fdl-times employment, the benefits of the seid ciroular cannot ald the respondents, Thus, there being a clear cut Gnding on simi larly placed anployess, we do net think we can ageiy ihe matic of the iadement deliversd is the case of Habih Khan Go ofa) in 3 XM ;
Support of the respondents' plea. An imreporicd judgment of < Kamateka High Court delivered on [eh Jane, 2611 in the case af WP No S1609/201 Union of Indie and Others Vs. Dattappa has also been cited on behalf of the respondents. This judgment went in favour of counting the peried of service as extre departmental Agent for quallfVing service in relation te Pension and the Division Bench of the Kamataka High Court sroceede:
as: 5 all intents and purpose, the employment was an the basis that | continuous in nature amd if was not as Hit was fom one service te another, But, Is view hms not bean accepted by this Court in the case of Union of India & Ors.Vs. Registrar &A BL(SUDNS), Ty. Ut ds alse the resnonckarts' case that under Clause AO3 of 2 Rules, Y they had served more thas § years and 3 months in remuler emmlovmeent, they would be enifed to have my # additional period computed for the purpose of gquallfving service.
said Rals 49¢3} weseeltee "Tn oalculating the length of qualifying service, fection ofa year = --
equal to three months and above shall be treated ay a completed one half year and reckoned as qualliMng services."
Arguments were advanced that if within a period of one YOU an employes had served more than six months, then the iatal Ponmputed ag Ovice ihe pert oy enufoyment fen ought to cas hall year in feo tmnebes and one year ought to he added to "
the gerving. Bat an ¢ plain reading of the a my Bp Syagk 5 RAS Ak é oe xe 3 S SSG og $ wz t ™ LS % 3 saab: be, % 5 gy oe tyke e ook 2 th & Bg # Rew oA we : i : % % Bp Ey a os fea ec we Bs ke soc Oo Boome OB Oe a ty. ted es bs ae A Rs ake £8 8 Sos oo ps Be a5 bee BA ox oe 8: RB woes ee ms we Pa os oe oo Zs ee BO RS Sy wee & be eg eB > eg & Ls ie GS ee i oa weg 8 oF oan €s, ee ES 3B Fees ye 4h gee fs Foot Ran fe '4 a tee poe oe y os pas ad One Ee weet By ees
5 % at Ba Ce 2% ae ae epee. ", pe A:
Lt ap Sen, Powe oe ba oe:
: EE oe & As cae oes 3 gee go os iF Se *e CBee pion aoe * Ugh Ba eS 3A tp Oh Spore eg Re BiB Rag rae 4 :
iS seen Us ra es oo ee > poy 2 BE o pe BB ae ee a eS 4 ae. 'te oe bat) 69 Oh Sh Ba ae, oe a wo fre. oe: Te Be x per GE eke x oR fe ee ge EE *, fet og 2 ee ° va : oo Boo ER we, ioe) ° wo Bb vat ee bes Aa EG e a be fo A BR ew es ee ed we , x : be baie a5 OEE eS ned 5 stn ¢ y oo oe Loney a re BF. wanes s at 4 Cf "ae 3 ne es ae: 'ex ee ee ao a 5 ue BSS a tye OM ay a " ea Ge wee me ee ee % be woe hee gg ey go Be ee Be 3 & 2 +S : ay we @ Oe & oR " oh me fy z f 5 i al , a ; on ¢ ho % ek : " 43 JE $ we oe a ee or ros Seo SS Gt 5 om, ' faa: ate Keo ey a 2 -
eB , 2 A 4 gs es € 2 8 3 BB tn od ae : oh ae "a Gk yo we i wie nee GS AG fab tA soe f ba ; wad 4 saa p67 wo8 eet oS Be es "ee B gs iE FB = ae ee : SA ae pe AR Bg Tbe. be Ra cS 5 Sapo $ beter oo oe 2, ay ne 4 xo es 3 5 Be ape oe & a Be Se oF 4 a4 me oe tp oe . 7 dead L Bo fs, Aas: . . a i ee 5 Eo fe OM pe ee ew Beas. aoe ow a Pee ine ee nf Pre, or he % ae oh a By we Roa pe oa ee Be ares Ze, ee ee. S 3 A we . 53 3 oe. we ES "es $4; tug oo Be Pere ae St tea o t yh Re be ree ' ag on 'ee, oop. ae ae os ea 5 gs oe Soa: A gs ney he pa Ge pod ny te ee ewe ap. tat eee : arrk tee 4 < ite one: pee wy oe an Re te ee CBs ee eo oS wes. vs ap a5 : ore be ap #S oe BB ne eS A om ees oe 5 * = ee 43 %, oa me or, : te et ¢ peed, AY, ¥ oy " 2 © Soe Bg oe hice 2 Be 3 g 2 oe ey OB BO ga & a : sd Shag ome we a Bee ge he Ba 3 ae a ae 3 Se 4 ge A a aS , ? B a oy oe ae on ge WS "nk e ge na re po $3 eee $ nee > fox ete. 2A oe Rone foe Bee Noe nok eee oes He tang ek oe St Z Seg ee ran an "Se Sos Be " £3 or 3 E58 2 pet OD. :
Lee Oe pe, xe se De a, ~. ey : oe 5 mi ee oe oe Oe : pa ay oS Gos ee Z 3 baa a eB . 1 a" oS Se Sapa, Bo BR oe SS Z z . 43 G4 oO / eo ge Bg gE gp RR Bg SO GR ge Bs oe ag tp BE a: a , * pi Be SF. earn be tee, bad, it at en 5% as f nigee Ga a SE ot Lo : ae od % ces eA 2 ih AS tek Soo ye 8 kee, 45 eo % oy of 4 " aS Se aes oe a ft a oo on t5 oe F% con ke fe ee we ge ee YB OS gk va Rg Oe aS @ son 3 i ghee é 4 om Fas : D a4 th shee: 5 cas a nae & Sect ot) 2 rae beens oe a ot A, negee S wed. ot eness oe 2 my ae oe = oon ia ee oy 7) A oS a te. ae a ay oe c bees ae Be ke 6 es Bee ge ge Bo a Be BR a Ws & ee. 2 BSE Hoe os 3 eS ay Pb £3 oo ES Ee Y = TE on et i ; QA TS of 20 on the question of grant of pension, But we also find many of the respondents are missing persica on account of marginal shortfall in their regular service tenure, This should deserve sympathetic consideration for gram of pension. But we canaet trace our power or jurisdiction to any legal principle which could permit us to HN up the shortiall by importing inte their service tenure, the period of work they rendered as GDS or its variants, At the same time, we also find that In the esse of Union of India & Ors, v The Registrar & Anr. (supra), though the incumbent therein (being respondent no2) had completed nine years and two months of service, the Linton of India had passed orders granting him regular pension. This Court in the order passed en 24"
November 2015 hisd protected his pension though the appeal of Union of India was allowed, 20, For the reasons we Save already discussed, we are of the apinion that the judgments under appeal cannot be sustained. There is no provision ander the law on the basis of which any nerind of the service rendered by the reapondents in the capacity of GDS could be added to their regular tenure in the postal department for the purpose of fulfilling the period of qualifying Service an the question of gaan of pension.
ail, We are also of the opinion that the authorities ought to consider ihe cases Aw exercising the power to sax the mandatory requirement of qualifying service under the [972 Rules uf they find the conditions conisined in Rule 88 stand fulied in any of these cases, We do not accept the sland of the appellants that just because that exercise would be prolonged, recourse to Rule 88 ought net to be takes. The said Rules is sot mumber specific, and if undue hardship is caused to a oe :
es v s < x been issucd, des same shall net be disharbedl, as has heen directed sg the case af Umion of India & Ors. v Registrar & Ann (supra), We, a allow these appeals and set aside the judgmen iD fa HaOSion fo any of the 3 should not be disturked. fp e which was directed to be adopted om this Cot in the case af Union of India&Ors. v. Registrar &Ann(soprs).
G9 Ip respect of the othe searciants, whe have sor Rees wet Reue any arder for Eee . Me cumerneal miugiry sae nig whether any 2 appeN TUOIO fo B Sac a. Rules de not apecily the same. Thas, what is to be sean js whether thera je any Seen riling in this regard, When statutory rales provided thar appointments shall SF mE feo ammal basis promotional exercise must be comp! the Ade (Rat exi Me relevant point of Gme that shoul Oe By a oS ge Ser appolmmest mey alse be Apex Court in the spor of urior &. The padgment in ne ro Bangaiat x a perv ava Ram LOsS) 3 SCC 284 dealt veth emuired that the promational exer cle must oe completed i weithin the relevant year, S Where there (8 no ipgal compulsion, date af occurrence of the vacancy & inconsmquential. The Apex Oourt has is the case af Union of India vs NuC. Mural fe * ai appearing far the armetants aise glace Ss x, "
S, . eo STs Say: Seg RCA RERAE RD AS ERR MeN OS gates ent af this Court in Seno! Cher Sites x iS v. Linen of fpgia. Para 7 of the judemerd reads as folhews: (SCC Se has been held ge co ee prometon a fect from the dat y » the dats af oomurrence ~ epost vid 2 oF dual vA eo {far anchal vi Dos sar Sharma, Kx By < Aw fe af 4. Saniae BR. Sate e 0 vy. Mtate of Bidtan, ete."
17. In view of the law lod down in the aboventntloned cases, 1 @ ee there is specific cule entitling the applicants ce , from ihe date af ucaarrence af ACSHON, the WENNOLIN GOGe MET C cone alias an the dete af -- STIS © PFONy sation is to be extended an the date when = 2, since ihe * em prices taak place only is 204 afier the introduction of new Pension im Rades, 1972 have no application. No malafids could alse be levelled against the reapondents on their not Gling up the post in 2002 or TINS since it was not expected that there would be drastic change in the Pension Rules.
a ¢ x oe Pee.
gX me att ape:
By QAM of B48
10. In view of the above, as the palng af law on which the relief sought asanis to be acttied finally by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, Dele not ful any acne for Interferens by this Tnbunal. In the clrcumsiaces the OA Je Hable to be dismissed and is s \ N, "pereseatoed?