Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
D Rangashetty vs Department Of Posts on 19 July, 2024
1 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00405/2023
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S SUJATHA ...MEMBER(J)
1. Shri D.Rangashetty,
S/o late Doddashetty,
Aged about 77 years,
DOB: 01.07.1947,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Branch Post Master (BPM),
Yeriyur Branch Office,
Yelandur Sub Office,
Kollegal Sub-Division,
Kollegal Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571440.
R/o Yeriyur,
Yelandur Post Office,
Chamrajnagar -571441.
2. Shri Sheshadri,
S/o late Rama Murthy,
Aged about 70 years,
DOB:02.03.1954,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Branch Post Master (BPM)/
Delivery Power (DP)
Kempaiahna Hundi Branch Office,
2 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
Gargeshwari Sub Office,
T.Narasipura Sub-Division,
Kollegal Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571122.
R/at Hale Kempaiahna Hundi,
Hosakote Dakhle,
Kasaba Hobli,
T.Narasipura Taluk,
Mysuru-571110.
3. Shri K.Hanumanth Setty,
S/o late Karishetty,
Aged about 69 years,
DOB:29.09.1954,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Branch Post Master (BPM)/
Delivery Power (DP),
Yeriyur Branch Office,
Gundlupet Sub Office,
Nanjangud Sub-Division,
Nanjangud Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571301.
R/at Yariyur BO & Post,
Gundlupet Taluk-571 111.
4. Shri Y.H.Nagaraju,
S/o late Hanumanth Shetty,
Aged about 69 years,
DOB: 29.09.1954,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Branch Post Master (BPM)/
3 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
Delivery Power (DP),
Bommanahalli Branch Office,
Tirukanambi Sub Office,
Chamarajanagara Sub-Division,
Nanjangud Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571301.
R/at Yariyuru Post
Gundlupet Taluk 571 111.
5. Shri S.Nataraju,
S/o late S.Shankaranarayanappa,
Aged about 69 years,
DOB: 27.05.1955,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Branch Post Master (BPM),
Hundipura Branch Office,
Gundlupet Sub-Office
Nanjangud Sub-Division,
Nanjangud Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571301.
R/at Kebbepura,
Hundipura, Gundlupet,
Chamarajanagar-571 111.
6. Shri Thanthachari B.,
S/o late Basavachari,
Aged about 68 years,
DOB:01.07.1955,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Assistant Branch Post Master (ABPM)/
Extra Department Delivery Agent (EDDA),
4 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
Tellanur Branch Office,
Kollegal Sub-Division,
Kollegal Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571440.
R/at Marigudi Street,
Tellanur Post, Kollegal,
Chamarajanagar-571440.
7. Shri Veeran,
S/o late Irusappa,
Aged about 68 years,
DOB:12.11.1955,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Extra Departmental Deliver Agent (EDDA),
Kudalur Branch Office,
Kollegal Sub-Division,
Nanjangud Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571301
R/at Nelluru, Kollegal Taluk,
Kudalur,
Chamarajnagar-571 444.
8. Shri Nagabhushanaswamy,
S/o late G.M.Basappadevaru,
Aged about 67 years,
DOB: 18.07.1956,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Branch Post Master (BPM),
Gulipuru Branch Office,
Kagalavadi Sub Office,
Kollegal Sub-Division,
5 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
Kollegal Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571440.
R/at Gulipura Post & Village,
Chamarajanagar-571 117.
9. Shri R.Lakshminarayan,
S/o late A.Rajagopala Bhatta,
Aged about 67 years,
DOB: 10.08.1956,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Branch Post Master (BPM),
Ummathur Branch Office,
Kuderu Sub Office,
Chamarajanagara Sub-Division,
Nanjangud Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571 301.
R/at Ummathur post & Village,
Chamarajanagar -571 316.
10.Shri G.Rajachari,
S/o late Gurusiddachari,
Aged about 68 years,
DOB: 31.08.1955,
Gramin Dak Sevak (Retd.)
Branch Post Master (BPM),
Ambale Branch Office,
Yelandur Sub Office,
Kollegal Sub-Division,
Kollegal Head Office,
Nanjangud Division,
Karnataka -571440.
6 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
R/at No.239 New Extension,
Ambale Village & Post,
Ambale,
Chamarajanagar-571441. ...Applicants
(By Advocate Shri Somashekara K.M.)
Vs.
1. The Union of India,
Through its Secretary cum
Director General,
Communication Department,
Government of India, Dak Bhavan,
New Delhi 110001.
2. The Chief Post Master General,
Karnataka Circle,
Bengaluru-560001.
3. The Post Master General,
South Karnataka Region,
Karnataka Circle,
Bengaluru-560001.
4. The Director of Accounts (Postal),
BG GPO Complex,
Bengaluru-560001.
5. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Nanjangud Division,
Nanjangud,
Karnataka -571301. ...Respondents
(By Advocate, Mr.Sayed S. Kazi for Respondents)
7 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
O R D E R (ORAL)
The applicants have filed this application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
"a) To allow the OA, and direct the respondents to declare the Gramin Dak Sevaks i.e., the applicants as permanent employee of Postal Department with all consequential, monetary benefits, gratuity, pension and other benefits.
OR
b) Issue directions to the respondents to grant pensionary benefits to the applicants with effect from their date of age of superannuation, in the interest of justice and equity.
c) To pass such other order/s, as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice."
2. The applicants claims to be selected and appointed under Extra Departmental Agents (EDAs) now called as Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS). The details of the appointment are as under:
8 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH Sl. Applicants Date of Release Num-
No appoin- Date ber of
tment year
of
serv-
ice
1 D.Rangashetty 08.12.1971 30.06.2012 41
Applicant
No.1
2 Sheshadri 28.04.1977 01.03.2019 42
Applicant
No.2
3 K.Hanumanth 20.02.1982 28.09.2019 38
Setty
Applicant
No.3
4 Y.H.Nagaraju 20.02.1982 28.09.2019 38
Applicant
No.4
5 S.Nataraju 12.07.1976 26.05.2020 44
Applicant
No.5
6 Thanthachari 04.12.1978 30.06.2020 42
B.
Applicant
No.6
7 Veeran 04.12.1978 11.11.2020 42
Applicant
No.7
8 B.Nagabhusha 24.10.1978 17.07.2021 43
naswamy
Applicant
No.8
9 R.Lakshminara 08.03.1982 09.08.2021 39
yan
Applicant
No.9
10 G.Rajachari 28.08.1996 30.08.2020 24
Applicant
No.10
9 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
3. Pursuant to the representation submitted by one of the applicants to the respondents requesting to extend pensionary benefits to the Gramin Dak Sevaks, the 3rd Respondent has issued a letter dated 11.11.2020 stating that as per Rule-6 of GDS (C&E) Rules, 2011 ('Rules' for short), the Sevaks shall not be entitled for any pension benefits. The applicants have caused legal notice dated 23.08.2022 through their learned Counsel to Respondent No.5, calling upon to pay the eligible and entitled retirement benefits on par with the other employees in the Postal Department, which has not yielded any response.
Hence this OA.
4. Learned Counsel Shri Somashekara K.M., representing the applicants submitted that on attaining the age of superannuation, the applicants were terminated by the 5th Respondent as per the termination letters, wherein it has been stated that the applicants are governed by Gramin Dak Sevaks (Conduct & Engagement) Rules, 2011. As per Rule 6 of the Rules, 2011, the applicants are not entitled for pension benefits and denied the pension benefits to the applicants, which is 10 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH arbitrary and illegal. The applicants have worked for a period of 24 to 44 years. The selection and engagement methods, service conditions, nature of duties, job contents, risk etc., are similar to the regular Government employees and as such denial of pensionary benefits to the applicants on par with the employees of Postal Department is in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of Constitution. The learned Counsel placed reliance on the order of this Tribunal, Principal Bench in OA No.749/2015 and connected matters [(DD:17.11.2016) Vinod Kumar Saxena and others vs. Union of India and others], wherein it is held thus:
"20. To summarise, we dispose of the O.As. with the following directions to the respondents:
(a) For all Gramin Dak Sevaks, who have been absorbed as regular Group 'D' staff, the period spent as Gramin Dak Sevak will be counted in toto for the purpose of pensionary benefits.
(b) Pension will be granted under the provisions of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 to all Gramin Dak Sevaks, who retire as Gramin Dak Sevak without absorption as regular Group 'D' staff, but the period to be counted for
11 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH the purpose of pension will be 5/8th of the period spent as Gramin Dak Sevak. Rule 6 will accordingly be amended.
(c) The Gramin Dak Sevaks (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011 are held to be valid except Rule 6, as stated above.
(d) The claim of Gramin Dak Sevaks for parity with regular employees regarding pay and allowances and other benefits available to regular employees, stands rejected."
5. Learned Counsel further submitted that the aforesaid order of C.A.T., Principal Bench is challenged by the Union of India and others before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and the same is pending for consideration.
6. Learned Counsel made an attempt to distinguish the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. Gandiba Behera in Civil Appeal No.8497/2019 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.13042/2014), DD: 08.11.2019. The conditions set forth in the said judgment by the Hon'ble Apex Court while allowing the appeals has been strongly referred to, 12 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH to contend that the concerned Ministry has been directed to consider as to whether the minimum qualifying service rule can be relaxed in terms of Rule 88 of the 1972 Rules, where no order for pension has been issued to the GDS. Accordingly, seeks for the reliefs claimed.
7. Learned Counsel Shri Sayed S.Kazi representing the respondents, placing reliance on Gandiba Behera supra, submitted that the issue involved herein is squarely covered by the said judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that the services rendered by the employees as GDS or other Extra Departmental Agents, cannot be factored in for computing their qualifying service in regular posts under the Postal Department on the question of grant of pension. Learned Counsel submitted that the GDS are outside of the regular civil service and governed by Postal Extra Departmental Agents' (Conduct & Service) Rules, 1964, as amended from time to time. They had the liberty to engage themselves in other vocations. Hence the applicants do not come under the purview of regular employees 13 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH of the Postal department. Thus the GDS shall not be extended with any pensionary benefits. Accordingly, seeks for dismissal of the OA.
8. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
9. The moot point that arises for my consideration is, whether the applicants-GDS employees terminated on attaining the age of superannuation are entitled for grant of pensionary benefits on par with regular employees of the Postal department?
10. The issue involved herein, is more res-integra, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gandiba Behera supra, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that there is no provision under law on the basis of which any period of the service rendered by the respondent therein, 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 on the question of grant of pension.
14 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH
11. The Hon'ble Apex Court while rendering the aforesaid judgment has considered the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka delivered on 17.06.2011 in the case of Union of India and Others Vs. Dattappa (W.P. No. 81699/2011) and held that the view taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka has not been accepted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and others vs. Registrar and Another [Civil Appeal Nos.13675-13676/2015 (DD:24.11.2015)]. The decision rendered by the C.A.T., Principal Bench in OA No.749/2015 and connected matters (DD:17.11.2016)- Vinod Kumar Saxena vs. Union of India and others, is also noticed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Para- 10 of the said judgment. The Hon'ble Apex Court has also considered the pendency of the matter before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in W.P.(C) No.832/2018 filed by the Union of India challenging the order of the C.A.T., Principal Bench in Vinod Kumar Saxena and others supra. Having considered all the judgments holding the field (now relied upon by the learned Counsel for the applicant), the Hon'ble Apex Court in Gandiba 15 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH Behera supra, s summarized the legal principles in Paras- 19 & 20 as under:
"19. Having regard to the provisions of the aforesaid Rules relating to qualifying service requirement, in our opinion the services rendered by the respondents as GDS or other Extra Departmental Agents cannot be factored in for computing their qualifying services in regular posts under the postal department on the question of grant of pension. But we also find many of the respondents are missing pension on account of marginal shortfall in their regular service tenure. This should deserve sympathetic consideration for grant of pension. But we cannot trace our power or jurisdiction to any legal principle which could permit us to fill up the shortfall by importing into their service tenure, the period of work they rendered as GDS or its variants. .....................................................
20. For the reasons we have already discussed, we are of the opinion that the judgments under appeal cannot be sustained. There is no provision under the law on the basis of which any period of the service rendered by the respondents in the capacity of GDS could be added to their regular tenure in the postal department for 16 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH the purpose of fulfilling the period of qualifying service on the question of grant of pension."
12. The aforesaid judgment being binding on this Tribunal, the arguments of the learned Counsel for the applicant has no legs to stand and deserves to be negated.
13. Rule 88 of 1972, Rules, referred to by the Hon'ble Apex Court in condition-(ii) of Para-21 in Gandiba Behera supra, would be of no assistance to the applicants since all the applicants have completed more than 10 years of service as GDS. Examining whether the minimum qualifying service can be relaxed in terms of Rule 88 of Rules, 1972 in case of the present applicants does not arise at all.
14. For the reasons aforesaid, OA lacks merit. Resultantly, OA stands dismissed. No order as to costs.
(JUSTICE S.SUJATHA) MEMBER(J) sd.
17 OA 405/2023/CAT/BANGALORE BENCH