Central Administrative Tribunal - Lucknow
Shitla Prasad Shukla vs Union Of India on 6 December, 2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
LUCKNOW BENCH
LUCKNOW
Order reserved on: 29.11.2022
Order pronounced on: 06.12.2022
CORAM
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR OJHA, MEMBER-J
Hon'ble Mr. DEVENDRA CHAUDHARY MEMBER-A
Original Application No. 332/00414/2019
Udai Chand, aged about 62 years, son of late Chotey Lal, Retired as C.P.,
Mali, Resident of Shree Nagar Colony, Khubpur, District-Sitapur.
....Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Sunil Kumar
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Posts, Dak
Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. Post Master General, (HQ), Lucknow Region, Lucknow.
4. General Manager (Finance) & Postal Accounts, Aliganj, Lucknow.
5. Superintendent of Post Offices, Sitapur Division, Sitapur.
....Respondents
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00234/2021
Smt. Kamrul Nisha, aged about 61 years, wife of late Mohd. Sher Ali,
Retired as Temporary Status Group 'D' Employee, Divisional Office,
Sultanpur at present residing at House No. 418, Dariyapur, Opposite
Suraj Talkies, Sultanpur.
Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Sunil Kumar
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication &
IT, Department of Posts, Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. General Manager (Finance) & Postal Accounts, Sector-D Aliganj,
Lucknow.
4. Post Master General, Allahabad Region, Allahabad.
5. Superintendent of Post Offices, Sultanpur Division, Sultanpur.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
Page 1 of 15
With
Original Application No. 332/00292/2022
Dukh Ram, aged about 62 years, son of Late Shri Jagannath, Resident of
- Adarsh Nagar, Dalmau, District- Raebareli.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Praveen Kumar
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through the Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle,
Lucknow.
2. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Raebareily Division, Raebareily.
...Respondents
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00443/2019
Magdoom Prasad Gupta, aged about 61 years son of Shri Shiv Nath
Gupta, resident of Village - Shivpur Khurd, Post - Shivpur, District-
Pratapgarh, U.P.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Anil Kumar Yadav
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Posts,
Government of India, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Pratapgarh.
4. Sub-Divisional Inspector, Pratapgarh.
...Respondents
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00444/2019
Shyam Raj Maurya, aged about 61 years, son of Shri Gokul Prasad
Maurya, resident of Village - Patulki, Post- Biharganj, Police Station-
Antu, District - Pratapgarh.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Anil Kumar Yadav
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Posts,
Government of India New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Pratapgarh.
Page 2 of 15
4. Sub-Divisional Inspector, Pratapgarh.
...Respondents.
By Advocate : Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00107/2020
Sita Ram aged about 60 years son of Late Ram Lautan resident of
Mohalla Phulwariya bye pass crossing Bibhunapur, Balramplur District,
Balrampur retired from the post of Chaukidar (temporary status) in sub
post office Bhagwatiganj, district Balrampur.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Ms. Pallavi Dubey holding brief for Shri R.P. Shukla
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through the Secretary Department of Post &
Telegraph, Ministry of Telecommunication, Government of India, New
Delhi-110001.
2. The Director General of Posts, New Delhi-110001.
3. The Post Master General Gorakhpur Region Gorakhpur -273001.
4. The Superintendent of Posts Offices, Gonda Division Gonda-271001.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00106/2020
Om Prakash Shukla aged about 62 years son of Sri Mahraj Dull resident
of Village Harkhapur post Kaudia, District Gonda retired from the post of
Chaukidar (temporary status), Sub post office Kaudia, District Gonda.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Ms. Pallavi Dubey holding brief for Shri R.P. Shukla
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through the Secretary Department of Post &
Telegraph, Ministry of Telecommunication, Government of India, New
Delhi-110001.
2. The Director General of Posts, New Delhi-110001.
3. The Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Hazratganj, Lucknow-
226001.
4. The Post Master General Gorakhpur Region Gorakhpur -273001.
5. The Superintendent of Posts Offices, Gonda Division Gonda-271001
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Shri Ram Bilash Verma
Page 3 of 15
With
Original Application No. 332/00273/2018
Balram Maurya aged about 62 years, S/o Late Ramdas Maurya R/o Para
Basupur (Akhand Nagar), Post Akhand Nagar, Distt. Sultanpur.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Prashant Kumar Singh holding brief for Shri AP Singh
Versus
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication,
Department of Posts, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
2. The Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow
3. Senior Superintendent of post offices, Sultanpur.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00174/2021
Om Prakash Shukla, aged about 61 years, son of Shri Ram Pyare
Shukla, Retired as Temporary Status Group 'D' employee, Office of Head
Post Office, Sultanpur at present residing at Village and Post Semri
Purushottampur, Ramganj, Sultanpur.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Sunil Kumar
Versus
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication &
IT, Department of Posts, Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. General Manager (Finance) & Postal Accounts, Sector-D Aliganj,
Lucknow.
4. Post Master General, Allahabad Region, Allahabad.
5. Superintendent of Post Offices, Sultanpur Division, Sultanpur.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00173/2020
Radhey Lal, aged about 61 years, son of late Lal Bihar, Resident of
Village-Raniganj, Mau Atwara, Amethi, Sultanpur.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Sunil Kumar
Page 4 of 15
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication &
IT, Department of Posts, Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-
110001.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. General Manager (Finance) & Postal Accounts, Sector-D Aliganj,
Lucknow.
4. Superintendent of Post Offices, Sultanpur Division, Sultanpur.
5. Post Master General, Allahabad Region, Allahabad.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00015/2019
Sudhakar Pandey aged about 61 years son of Shiv Sharan Pandey,
resident of Village & Post- Barachha, Tehsil - Sadar, District- Pratapgarh
U.P.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Anil Kumar Yadav
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Posts,
Government of India New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Pratapgarh.
4. Sub-Divisional Inspector, Pratapgarh.
...Respondents
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00016/2019
Raj Pati Pal (dead) substituted by
1. Draupadi aged about 60 years w/o Rajpati Pal.
2. Raj Kumar Pal aged about 25 years S/o Late Rajpati Pal.
Both resident of Village - Pure Bhaiya Ji, Post- Babu Patti, District-
Pratapgarh.
... Applicants
By Advocate: Shri Anil Kumar Yadav
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Posts,
Government of India New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Pratapgarh.
4. Sub-Divisional Inspector, Pratapgarh.
Page 5 of 15
...Respondents
By Advocate: Shri Ram Bilash Verma
With
Original Application No. 332/00298/2020
Rajendra Prasad aged about 60 years son of Kailash Nath Resident of
Village Birmapur, post Khargupur, District Gonda, retired from the post
of Chaukidar (temporary status Group-D) in sub post office Khargupur,
district Gonda.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Ms. Pallavi Dubey holding brief for Shri R P Shukla
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through the Secretary Department of Post &
Telegraph, Ministry of Telecommunication, Government of India, New
Delhi-110001.
2. The Director General of Posts, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.
3. The Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Hazratganj, Lucknow-
226001.
4. The Post Master General Gorakhpur Region Gorakhpur -273001.
5. The Superintendent of Posts Offices, Gonda Division Gonda-271001
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00534/2022
Smt. Lilawati, aged about 58 years, widow of Late Shri Shanker Ji Tiwari,
Resident of Post- Shivpur, Distt.- Pratapgarh.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Praveen Kumar
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication,
Department of Posts, Government of India, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. The Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow
3. The Senior Superintendent of post offices, Pratapgarh Division,
Pratapgarh.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
Page 6 of 15
With
Original Application No. 332/00359/2022
Deo Narayan Yadav, aged about 64 years, son of late Shri Chandra Pal,
Resident of- Village- Poore Vijay Singh, Merui, Lalganj, Raebareli.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Praveen Kumar
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle,
Lucknow.
2. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Raebareily Division, Raebareily.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00217/2016
1. Shitla Prasad Shukla, aged about 56 years, son of Shri Ram
Samokhan Shukla, resident of Village Kanchhar, Post Office
Bisheshwar Ganj, District Bahraich.
2. Bachha Lal Mishra aged about 58 years, son of Shri Deen Dayal
Mishra, resident Village Katra Bahadur Ganj, Post Office Kalpipara,
District Bahraich.
... Applicants
By Advocate: Shri Prashant Kumar Singh
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Posts,
Government of India New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. Director of Postal Services (HQ), Lucknow.
4. Director of Accounts (Postal), Sector-D, Aliganj, Lucknow.
5. Superintendent of Post Offices, Bahraich.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00247/2020
Ram Jag, aged about 62 years, son of Ram Dayal, Retired Group-IV
Employee, Resident of House No. 238, Singarai Purwa, Lauvabeerpur,
Gonda.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Awadesh Kumar Tiwari
Page 7 of 15
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication,
Department of Posts, Dak Tar Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow.
3. Post Master General, Lucknow Region, Lucknow.
4. General Manager (Vitt) Dak Lekha, Uttar Pradesh Region, Lucknow.
5. Superintendent of Post Offices, Gonda Division, Gonda.
6. Post Master, Pradhan Dak Ghar, Gonda.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Shri Alok Shukla
With
Original Application No. 332/00200/2016
Jagdeo Prasad, aged about 61 years, son Late Shri Madhoraj, resident of
Village Barohi, Post Office Payagpur, District Bahraich.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Prashant Kumar Singh
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Posts,
Government of India New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. Director of Postal Services (HQ), Lucknow.
4. Director of Accounts (Postal), Sector-D, Aliganj, Lucknow.
5. Superintendent of Post Offices, Bahraich.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00294/2016
Smt. Shanti Devi, aged about 66 years, son of Late Shri Dhanai Singh,
resident of Village Khargapur, Post Office Huzupur, District Bahraich
... Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Prashant Kumar Singh
Page 8 of 15
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Posts,
Government of India New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow.
3. Director of Postal Services (HQ), Lucknow.
4. Director of Accounts (Postal), Sector-D, Aliganj, Lucknow.
5. Superintendent of Post Offices, Bahraich.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta.
With
Original Application No. 332/00106/2019
Budhi Prakash Srivastava [dead] substituted by
1. Smt. Geeta, aged about 53 years, Wife of late Budhi Prakash
Srivastava, R/o Mau, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow.
2. Shailesh Srivastava, aged about 33 years, S/o of late Budhi Prakash
Srivastava, R/o Mau, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow.
3. Shikha Srivastava, aged about 31 years, D/o of late Budhi Prakash
Srivastava, R/o Mau, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow.
4. Richa Srivastava, aged about 28 years, D/o of late Budhi Prakash
Srivastava, R/o Mau, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow.
5. Saurabh Srivastava, aged about 26 years, S/o of late Budhi Prakash
Srivastava, R/o Mau, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow.
... Applicants
By Advocate: Shri Dharmendra Awasthi
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication,
Department of Posts, Dak Tar Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Lucknow Division, Lucknow.
3. Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices, East Upmandal, Lucknow-7.
4. A.S.P.Os. (East) Lucknow-7
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
With
Original Application No. 332/00281/2019
Sita Ram aged about 59 years son of late Ram Lautan resident of
Mohalla Phulwariya by pass crossing Bibhunapur, Balrampur district
Page 9 of 15
Balrampur presently posted as Chaukidar (temporary status) in sub post
office Bhagwatiganj, district Balrampur.
... Applicant
By Advocate: Ms. Pallavi Dubey holding brief for Shri R P Shukla
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through the Secretary Department of Post &
Telegraph, Ministry of Telecommunication, Government of India, New
Delhi.
2. The Director General of Posts, New Delhi.
3. The Chief Post Master General, U.P. Circle, Hazratganj, Lucknow.
4. The Post Master General Gorakhpur Region Gorakhpur.
5. The Superintendent of Posts Offices, Gonda Division Gonda.
...Respondents.
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta
ORDER
BY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR OJHA- MEMBER-J Heard learned counsels for the applicant, learned counsels for the respondents and perused the records.
The aforementioned Original Applications have been filed with prayer to issue direction to the respondents to pay pensionary benefits as per provisions of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.
Submissions of the learned counsels for the applicants are that applicants were engaged as whole time contingency paid staff on the post of Sweeper/ Mali/ Chaukidar/ Mail career/ Casual Labour by the Department on different dates. They were given temporary status at par With Group-D employee. All the applicants have served in the department varying from 22 to 42 years of service yet they have been denied retiral benefits. Further submission is that similarly situated employees are getting pension and other post retiral benefits.
Learned counsels for the applicants vehemently argued that in Central Administrative Tribunal here at Lucknow and several other Benches of the Tribunal have passed judgments providing retiral benefits and pension to the similarly situated employees of the same department and orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Allahabad Bench and Lucknow Bench have been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad and its Lucknow Bench. Special Leave Petitions filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court have also been dismissed.
Page 10 of 15On the strength of above arguments, learned counsels for the applicants submitted that applicants be also provided pensionary benefits.
Per contra, learned counsels for the respondents strongly opposed the aforesaid submissions and urged that CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi in OA No. 3573 of 2017- Mehak Singh Vs. Ministry of Communication and two others has rejected the similar claim. Further submitted that Hon'ble Apex Court while dismissing the Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 29280 of 2018 has left all questions of law open. Therefore, law of point of providing pension to the applicants is not settled.
In O.A. No. 1626 of 2005- Shyam Lal Shukla vs. UoI & Ors., CAT, Allahabad Bench allowed the O.A. and directed the respondents to ensure payment of pension and all other post retiral benefits.
Writ Petition No. 60272 of 2009 [Union of India and others vs. Shyam Lal Shukla and others (2012) 1 UPLBEC 225] filed against aforesaid judgment of the CAT, Allahabad Bench in O.A. No. 1626 of 2005 came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 23.12.2011.
In the aforesaid writ, the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad has held that Rule 154 A clearly spells out its essential purpose, to give pensionary benefit to certain class of employees as 'regular employee', notwithstanding the fact that no formal order of regularization was passed.
The relevant portions of the judgment are quoted hereunder:
"14. In our view the said Rule clearly spells out its essential purpose, to give pensionary benefit to certain class of employees as 'regular employee', notwithstanding the fact that no formal order of regularization was passed.
15. Sri Singhal has relied on the judgment of Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow passed in Original Application No. 509 of 2004. We have perused the said judgment. In the said case, the learned Tribunal has not taken note of the Scheme framed by the Department dated 12.4.2001 and paragraph 17 of the Scheme wherein it is clearly provided that no recruitment will made from open market for Group D posts (except on compassionate appointment) till casual labours with requisite qualifications are available to fill up the posts in question. Moreover, the Tribunal has also mis-construed Rule 154 (a) as it has not appreciated the said Rule in correct prospective. It appears, the relevant part of the said Rule wherein it is provided that the Chowkidars etc. should be treated as "regular employee" subject to completion of conditions mentioned therein, has escaped the notice of the learned Tribunal.
16. Sri Singhal has also relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi reported in 2006 (2) UPLBEC 1880. The said judgement has no application in the present case as in the present matter the Scheme has been framed by the Postal Department in compliance of the order of the Supreme Court and the said Scheme has been approved by the Supreme Court. Thus the Postal Department/Petitioner herein Page 11 of 15 cannot resile from its obligation to implement the said Scheme in letter and spirit.
17. In the background of the aforesaid facts we are satisfied that there is no error in the impugned judgment of the Tribunal and it does not call for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution.
18. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed."
Petition for Special Leave to appeal against the aforesaid judgment also came to be dismissed in Petition for Special Leave to appeal (Civil) No. 12664/2012- Union of India & Ors. vs. Shayam Lal Shukla on 06.08.2012.
In OA No. 155/2012- Amanullah vs. Union of India & Ors. , CAT, Lucknow Bench vide order dated 04.04.2013 allowed the O.A. and held that this O.A. therefore deserves to be and is, accordingly allowed with an observation that the applicant is entitled to such retiral benefits as are admissible to Group-D employees on regular basis. Therefore, the respondents are directed that the pension and remaining retiral benefits pending, if any, including arrears, if any, admissible to the applicant may be considered and paid in accordance with relevant rules.
Writ Petition (Service Bench) No. 1413 of 2013 filed against the aforesaid judgment of CAT, Lucknow Bench in OA 155/2012, came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 1.2.2016.
The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment is quoted hereunder:
"The issue in question is not res-integra. The law on this point has been settled and therefore, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal.
The writ petition is dismissed."
In OA No. 62/2018-Shiv Balak vs. Union of India & Ors., CAT, Lucknow Bench, vide order dated 24.02.2021 allowed the O.A. and held that applicant is entitled for pension as admissible to him in accordance with rules.
Writ petition No. 26696 (Service Bench) of 2021 filed against the aforesaid judgment of the CAT, Lucknow Bench dated 24.02.2021 in OA 62/2018 came to be dismissed vide order dated 17.11.2021.
The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment is quoted hereunder:
"The present writ petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 50,000/- on the petitioners for wasting the precious time of the Court, but after passing of the said order, Shri S.B. Pandey, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India stated that the cost imposed may be waived off as he assures the Court that no such petitions will be filed by the Union of India, thus, in view of the same, the cost imposed of Rs. 50,000/- on the petitioners is waived off.Page 12 of 15
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed."
In OA No. 94/2017 alongwith 05 other cases, CAT, Lucknow Bench vide order dated 18.09.2018 disposed of the OAs in terms of decision in case of Amanullah vs. UoI & Ors. (OA No. 155 of 2012) decided on 4th April, 2013.
Writ petition (Service Bench) No. 18482/2019 filed against aforesaid judgment came to be dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court, Lucknow Bench with cost of Rs. 5000/- on the petitioner vide judgment dated 8.7.2019.
The relevant portions of the aforesaid judgment are quoted hereunder:
"15. We have specifically asked learned counsel for the petitioner/Union of India whether earlier claims of Union of India on the issue have been rejected up to Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Learned counsel admits that indeed the cases filed by Union of India on the issue have been dismissed. Rights of the employee to retiral benefits have been upheld.
16. We asked learned counsel for Union of India to cite any judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India which denies similar claim of employees on similar footing. Learned counsel has not been able to cite any such judgment.
It is evident that the Union of India, Department of Posts has not acted responsibly in filing this petition despite all other cases on similar issue having been decided against the Union of India.
This Court has been informed that in all other earlier cases in which original applications had been allowed, pensionary benefits have already been granted. The judicial verdicts rendered have already been accepted.
17. For all the reasons given above, we hereby dismiss this petition, however subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as cost, payable to the respondent/employee.
18. Let a copy of this order be conveyed to Secretary, Ministry of Communication, Department of Posts, Government of India, Daak Bhawan, New Delhi so that repeated petitions are not filed where the principles of law have already been settled."
In OA No. 203 of 2012 alongwith 12 other cases, CAT, Lucknow Bench allowed the OAs wherein present Member (A) was one of the Members of that Division Bench who passed the judgment dated 15.02.2019 direct the respondents to regularize the services of the applicants and thereafter consider their cases for grant of consequential benefits including pension and pensionary benefits.
Admittedly, no writ petition has been filed against the aforesaid order dated 15.02.2019 passed by CAT, Lucknow Bench in OA No. 203 of 2012 alongwith 12 other cases.
Rule 154 (A) of the Post & Telegraphs Ministerial Manual Establishment provides as follows:
Page 13 of 15"Selected categories of whole time contingency paid staff, such as Sweepers, Malis, Bhisties, Chaukidars, Chopdars or Gardeners, Khalasis and such other categories as are expected to work side by side With regular employees or With employees in work-charged establishment should for the present, be brought on to regular establishment of which they form adjuncts and should be treated as "regular" employees."
From the perusal of Rule 154-A of Manual it is manifestly clear that the Chowkidar, Sweeper, Malis, Khalassis who worked side by side with employees in Work Charge Establishment should be brought on regular Establishment and should be treated 'regular employees'.
It is also pertinent to mention that scheme known as 'Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme was formulated by department of Post, Government of India vide communication dated 12.04.1991 issued by Director General, Department of Post, New Delhi in compliance of the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition No. 1276 of 1986 laid by the Reserved Trained Pool Telephone Operators of Bombay and others connected with other writ petitions.
The relevant portion of the judgment in the said petition is quoted hereunder for ready reference:
"learned counsel for the petitioners concedes that the regularization of 21,000.00 employees in the Department of Telecommunications has been effected but complains that no such proceeding has taken place in respect of the postal employees. He states that there is pressing need for a parity of service conditions including pay, house rent allowance and other allowances between the temporary employees and the regular employees covered by this category. The learned Additional Solicitor General of India assures us that the scheme will be finalized latest by first weeks of April, 1989 and that complete position will be placed before the Court at that stage..."
The Scheme known as Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status in Regularisation) Scheme has been formulated and put into operation from 1/10/1989 and a copy thereof has been placed for our consideration. We find that the scheme is comprehensive and apart from provision for conferment of such status. Counsel for the respondent-Nigams have told us that the scheme will be given full effect and other benefits contemplated by the scheme shall be worked out. In these circumstances, no further specific direction is necessary in the two applications relating to the two Nigams of Bombay and Delhi except calling upon the respondents to implement every term of the scheme at an early date."
Applying the aforesaid principle to the facts of the present OAs, it is evident that in similarly situated cases in O.A. No. 1626 of 2005- Shyam Lal Shukla vs. UoI & Ors. judgment passed granting pensionary benefits by CAT, Allahabad Bench has been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad. Moreover, in OA No. 155/2012- Amanullah vs. UoI & ors., OA No. 62/2018- Shiv Balak vs. UoI & Ors. and in OA 94/2017- Ramesh Kumar Mishra vs. UoI & Ors. judgments passed by CAT, Lucknow Bench have been upheld by Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad at Lucknow Bench.
Page 14 of 15This Tribunal is bound by law laid down by Hon'ble High Court in Writ Petition No. 60272 of 2009, Writ Petition (Service Bench) No. 1413 of 2013, Writ petition No. 26696 (Service Bench) of 2021 and Writ petition (Service Bench) No. 18482/2019.
The contention of the learned counsels for the respondents has no force and deserves to be rejected.
The applicants of the aforesaid OAs were working on the post of Chaukidar, Mali, Mail Career, Casual Labour, Sweeper and granted temporary status at par with Group D employees and served varying from 22 to 42 years' service in the department.
In view of above facts and circumstances, on the basis of judgments passed by Hon'ble High Court Allahabad and its Lucknow Bench in Writ Petition No. 60272 of 2009, Writ Petition (Service Bench) No. 1413 of 2013, Writ petition No. 26696 (Service Bench) of 2021 and Writ petition (Service Bench) No. 18482/2019, applicants of all the OAs are entitled for pensionary benefits.
Therefore, the respondents are directed to grant the pensionary benefits to the applicants of all the OAs within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid direction, all the Original Applications are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending MAs in all the OAs, if any, also stand disposed of.
Copy of this order be placed in all connected O.As.
(Devendra Chaudhry) (Justice Anil Kumar Ojha)
Member (A) Member (J)
JNS
Page 15 of 15