Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam
Balakrishnan V vs Union Of India on 31 May, 2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM BENCH
Original Application No. 180/00231/2014
Tuesday, this the 31st day of May, 2016
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. U. Sarathchandran, Judicial Member
Hon'ble Mr. P.K. Pradhan, Administrative Member
Balakrishnan V., aged 63,
S/o. Kesavan Nambisan,
Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Post Master,
Nittur Post Office, Residing at Vadakkeyil House,
Nittur PO, Kakkattil - 673 507. ..... Applicant
(By Advocate : Mrs. R. Jagada Bai)
Versus
1. Union of India, represented by the Secretary,
to Department of Posts, New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Trivandrum - 695 033.
3. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Vatakara Division, Vatakara - 673 101.
4. The Inspector of Post Offices, Vatakara North
Sub Division, Vatakara - 673 101.
5. Post Master, Vatakara Head Post Office,
673 101. ..... Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. N. Anilkumar, Sr. PCGC (R)]
This application having been heard on 18.03.2016, the Tribunal on
31.05.2016 delivered the following:
ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. U. Sarathchandran, Judicial Member -
The short question to be considered in this case is whether the applicant, a Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Post Master (GDS BPM), on his request transfer as such to another Post Office within the same division is entitled to protection of the Time Related Continuity Allowance (TRCA) he was being paid at his earlier Post Office ?
2. Applicant was a GDS BPM at Kurichagam Post Office in Vatakara North Sub Division under the Vatakara Postal Division. As he suffered partial paralysis due to ischemic heart disease his mobility was restricted and therefore he applied for transfer on health grounds to Nittur Post Office which is a Post Office near to his home. His request was granted as per Annexure A/1 communication which reads :
'Sri V. Balakrishnan working as GDSBPM, Kurichagam is hereby appointed as GDSBPM, Nittur on transfer at request as per orders contained in Chief PMG, Kerala Circle, Trivandrum letter No. ST/12/8/NR/09 dated 22.03.2010. He shall be paid such TRCA and allowances of the post as are admissible from time to time.
2. The service rendered in the present post will be counted for assessing the eligibility in departmental examinations.
3. The transfer is approved as per the provisions contained in Directorate's letter No. 19-10/2004-GDS, dated 17.07.06 and is subject to the following conditions.
a) The GDS will have no claim to go back to the previous recruiting unit/division at a later date.
b) In the case of transfer from one recruiting unit to another, the GDS will rank junior in the seniority list of the new unit, to all the GDS of that unit who exist in the seniority list on the date on which the transfer is ordered.
c) Transfer will be at the cost and expenditure of the GD Sevak.
d) The GDS will be eligible to the minimum TRCA of the new post.
Sri V. Balakrishnan should clearly understand that his employment as GDSBPM Nittur shall be in the nature of a contract liable to be terminated by him or the undersigned by notifying the other in writing and he will be governed by the Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Employment) Rules 2001 and other orders issued from time to time.
If these conditions are acceptable to him, he should communicate his acceptance in the enclosed proforma.
Sd/-
(V.T. Lenin) Superintendent of Post Offices Vadakara Division, Vadakara - 673 101.'
3. The grievance of the applicant is that after transfer his TRCA was reduced to the tune of Rs. 2,437/- per month. While functioning as GDS BPM at Kurichagam Post Office his TRCA was in the band of Rs. 3,660-70- 5,760/- and the basic TRCA was Rs. 4,640/- with a total emolument of Rs. 6,268/-. But when he started working at Nittur Post Office his TRCA was reduced to the scale of Rs. 2,745-50-4,265/- with a total pay of Rs. 3,831/- vide Annexure A/3. Referring to Annexure A2 pay slip received by him while working at Kurichagam Post Office he states that the reduction in the TRCA has resulted in a loss of emoluments to the tune of Rs. 2,437/- per month. He has approached this Tribunal with the present OA seeking relief as under:
'(1) Declare that the applicant is eligible for promotion of his last drawn basic TRCA of Rs. 4640/- in the post of Branch Postmaster Kurichagam limiting it to the maximum TRCA of Rs. 4245/- in the TRCA scale of Rs. 2745-50-4245/- in the post of GDS BPM Nittur with effect from 7.4.2010 with all consequential benefits and arrears of TRCA.
(2) Any such remedy deemed fit and proper as this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to order.
(3) Grant costs to the applicant.' Applicant further contends that he is eligible to get the last drawn TRCA prior to his transfer to the new post in the light of Annexure A/7 Full Bench decision of this Tribunal.
4. Respondents resisted the OA contending that the applicant had agreed to the condition in Annexure A/1 communication that he would be eligible to the minimum TRCA of the new post. He had made a declaration vide Annexure R/1 agreeing to the aforesaid condition in Annexure A/1 before joining the post at Nittur. After having accepted the condition that he would be eligible to the minimum TRCA of the new post, the applicant is not justified in approaching this Tribunal with the present OA seeking protection of the TRCA drawn by him at the earlier station.
5. We have heard Mrs. Jagada Bai, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Mr. N. Anilkumar, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel (Retainer) appearing for the respondents. Perused the record.
6. Mrs. Jagada Bai submitted that the issue in this case is covered by Annexure A/7 Full Bench decision of this Tribunal. In Annexure A/7 this Tribunal had elaborately considered the issue of protection of TRCA for the GDS who are transferred within the recruitment unit. The Full Bench had also considered the issue whether protection of TRCA at the earlier station is permissible in the case of transfer to a different recruitment unit. It was held by the Full Bench that when the transfer is from one recruitment unit to another recruitment unit in the same or different post with identical TRCA or otherwise, such a transfer would be only as a fresh appointment and no protection of TRCA would be allowed. In cases of the transfers within the recruitment unit, the Full Bench held :
'(b) In so far as transfer from one post to the same Post with difference TRCA and within the same Recruitment Unit, administrative instructions provide for protection of the same vide order dated 11th October, 2004, subject only to the maximum of the TRCA in the transferred unit (i.e. maximum in the lower TRCA).' Mrs. Jagada Bai submitted that applicant is entitled to the benefit of the aforequoted decision of the Full Bench of this Tribunal.
7. It has to be noted that Annexure A/7 decision of this Tribunal on the above issue was rendered by order dated 14.11.2008. Nevertheless respondents decided to include a condition in Annexure A/1 transfer order dated 5.5.2010 when the applicant was transferred from Kurichagam Post Office to Nittur Post Office in the same post of GDS BPM within the same recruitment unit (Vatakara Postal Division) that he would be eligible to the minimum TRCA only in the new post. This is obviously in contravention of Annexure A/7 verdict of the Full Bench that in such cases the transferred GDS will be entitled to protection subject only to the maximum of TRCA in the transferred unit (i.e. maximum in the lower TRCA). Respondents do not dispute that the post of GDS BPM in the Nittur Post Office is placed in the TRCA slab of Rs. 2745-50-4265/-.
8. When law is laid down by a judicial decision on a specific issue, the departmental authorities are bound to follow that decision in subsequent instances rather than taking a different decision of their own. It is noteworthy that respondent No. 2 was a party in Annexure A/7 decision. It appears that Annexure A/7 order of the Full Bench has attained finality. Annexure A/1 was issued by respondent No. 5 with reference to an order passed by respondent No. 2 vide letter No. ST/120/8/NR/09, dated 22.3.2010. We are at a loss to understand as to why despite Annexure A/7 declaration of law made by this Tribunal, after having attained finality, was not followed by respondent No. 2 while imposing the condition in Annexure A1 that the GDS will be eligible only to the minimum TRCA of the new post. It is true that the applicant has agreed to the aforesaid condition in Annexure A/1, probably out of the compelling and distressing circumstances.
9. The Apex Court in Sub-Inspector Rooplal & Another v. Lt. Governor through Chief Secretary, Delhi & Ors. 2000 SCC (L&S) 213 observed :
'24. Before concluding, we are constrained to observe that the role played by the respondents in this litigation is far from satisfactory. In our opinion, after laying down appropriate rules governing the service conditions of its employees, a State should only play the role of an impartial employer in the inter-se dispute between its employees. If any such dispute arises, the State should apply the rules laid down by it fairly. Still if the matter is dragged to a judicial forum, the State should confine its role to that of an amicus curiae by assisting the judicial forum to a correct decision. Once a decision is rendered by a judicial forum, thereafter the State should not further involve itself in litigation. The matter thereafter should be left to the parties concerned to agitate further, if they so desire. When a State, after the judicial forum delivers a judgment, files review petition, appeal etc. it gives an impression that it is espousing the cause of a particular group of employees against another group of its own employees, unless of course there are compelling reasons to resort to such further proceedings. In the instant case, we feel the respondent has taken more than necessary interest which is uncalled for. This act of the State has only resulted in waste of time and money of all concerned.' (Italics supplied) We are of the view that the above observations of the Apex Court in Rooplal's case (supra) is quite apposite in the facts and circumstances of this case as well.
10. It is hereby declared that the applicant is eligible for protection of his last drawn basic TRCA i.e. Rs. 4,640/- in the post of GDS BPM, Kurichagam, limiting it to the maximum TRCA i.e. Rs. 4,245/- in the TRCA scale of Rs.2745-50-4245/- in the post of GDS BPM, Nittur with effect from 7.4.2010 with all consequential benefits and arrears of TRCA.
11. The Original Application is allowed as above. Parties are directed to suffer their own costs.
(P.K. PRADHAN) (U. SARATHCHANDRAN) ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER 'SA'