Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
G Subbaramani vs D/O Posts on 7 September, 2022
1 OA No.272/2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00272/2022
WE
WEDNESDAY, DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S SUJATHA ...MEMBER(J)
HON'BLE MR.RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA ...MEMBER(A)
G. Subramani,
Aged 62 years,
S/o Late P. Gopal,
Retired MTS,
C/o Magadi Road PO,
Bangalore - 560 023. ....Applicant
(By Advocate Shri. B. Venkateshan)
Vs.
1. The Union of India & others
Represented by the Secretary,
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan,
New Delhi - 110001.
2. The Postmaster General,
Bangalore H.Q Region,
Bangalore - 5600
3. The Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices,
Bangalore West Division,
Bangalore - 560086.
4. The Asst. Superintendent of Post Offices,
B'lore West Sub Division-11,
Division
Bangalore - 560020. ....Respondents
2 OA No.272/2022
O R D E R (ORAL)
Per: Justice S.Sujatha ...........Member(J)
The applicant, a retired employee is before this Tribunal challenging the DPC proceedings SSP(W) CON/MTS/PMN/2013 dated 30.8.2013 (Annexure A-8).
A
2. The applicant claims that he had put in about 27 years of service as GDS Packer in the Postal Department. He was promoted as MTS w.e.f.
w.e.f. 4.4.2014 and retired on 31.12.2019.
3. The applicant had filed OA.No.1182/2019 which came to be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh application as plural remedies were sought therein. In the 2nd round of litigation the applicant seeks seeks to consider his case for promotion to Postman and Gr.D cadres on seniority cum fitness basis w.e.f 1.3.2013.
4. Learned counsel Shri B.Venkates B.Venkateshan an appearing for the applicant would submit that the DPC has not recommended his promotion from GDS-Mail GDS Packerr to MTS and Postman ssince ince punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority was current as on 1.1.2013. Learned counsel made an attempt to contend that the period of currency of punishment had expired on 28.2.2013. The DPC grossly erred in not recommending recommending the applicant's name for 3 OA No.272/2022 promotion considering the punishment being current as on 1.1.2013 1.1.2013,, though hough such meeting was held on 30.8.2013 30.8.2013. Att the time of the proceedings held on 30.8.2013 no punishment order was current hence seeks to set aside the DPC pro proceedings ceedings and grant all consequential benefits accruing thereof.
5. We have carefully considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the materials on record.
6. At the threshold, the application deserves to be dism dismissed issed on the ground of delay and laches. It is the grievance of the applicant that he ought to have been promoted to MTS/Postman w.e.f. 1.3.2013 but was promoted to MTS cadre on 4.4.2014. Further representations made before the Authorities being rejected seeks for condoning the delay of about 4 years 6 months and 11 days after considering one year grace period in filing MA.No.239/2022.
7. Except submitting that OA. No.1182/2019 was filed by the applicant before this Tribunal and the same ca came me to be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file separate Original Applications in order to claim distinct relief, relief no satisfactory explanation is offered to condone the inordinate delay in challenging the DPC proceedings dated 30.8.2013. It is ex-facie apparent that no attempt was made by the applicant to challenge the said DPC proceedings during his 4 OA No.272/2022 service. Further it is pertinent to note that he retired from service on 31.12.2019 but no sufficient cause is shown for the delay and laches.
8. It iss not in dispute that the applicant was promoted to MTS cadre w.e.f. 4.4.2014 subsequent to the DPC proceedings impugned herein and the same was accepted by him without any objection. In such circumstances, circumstances challenging the DPC proceedings dated 30.8.2013 on some frivolous grounds that too too, after his retirement is wholly unsustainable. We have noticed that no challenge was made to the DPC proceedings dated 30.8.2013 in OA. No.1182/2019 and as such no shelter can be taken under the order dated 19.4.2022 pas passed sed in OA.No.1182/2019. We find no ground to entertain and adjudicate upon the issue at this length of time in the absence of sufficient cause shown for the delay caused.
9. In the result, both the Original Application No.272/2022 and MA.239/2022 stand dismissed. No order as to costs (RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA) (JUSTICE S.SUJATHA) MEMBER(A) MEMBER(J) bk.