Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam
S Kuttan Pillai vs M/O Information And Broadcasting on 10 August, 2018
1
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
Original Application No.180/00866/2015
Friday, this the 10th day of August, 2018
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. E.K. Bharat Bhushan, Administrative Member
Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Judicial Member
1. S. Kuttan Pillai,
Floor Assistant, Doordarshan Kendra,
Thiruvananthapuram - 695 043,
Residing at Vadakkevila Puthen Veedu,
Madanthacode, Kuzhimathicadu, Nellimukku P.O.,
Kollam - 691 509.
2. K.P. Mohanakumaran Nair,
Floor Assistant, Doordarshan Kendra,
Thiruvananthapuam - 695 043,
Residing at T.C. 17/194, Deepanjali, CRA-6,
M.K. Road, Poojappura,
Thiruvananthapuram - 695 012. ..... Applicants
(By Advocate - Mr. Vishnu S. Chempazhanthiyil)
Versus
1. Union of India represented by its Secretary,
Ministry of Information & Broadcasting,
New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Chief Executive Officer,
Prasar Bharathi Broadcasting Corporation of India,
Mandi House, New Delhi - 110 001.
3. The Director General, Doordarshan,
Directorate General of Doordarshan,
Doordarshan Bhawan, New Delhi - 10 001.
4. The Deputy Director General,
Doordarshan Kendra, Thiruvananthapuram -
695 043. ..... Respondents
(By Advocate - Mr. N. Anilkumar, Sr. PCGC )
2
This Original Application having been heard on 07.08.2018, the
Tribunal on 10.08.2018 delivered the following:
ORDER
Per: Ashish Kalia, Judicial Member -
The relief sought by the applicants are as under:
"1. Call for the records leading to the issue of Annexure A19 and A20 and set aside Annexure A19 and A20.
2. Declare that the applicant are identically placed like Shri. R. Krishnamoorthy, who was appointed as Floor Assistant as per Annexure A4 order dated 15.10.1992 and that the applicants are entitled to equal treatment on their being, appointed as Floor Assistants by extending the same service benefits as due to R. Krishnamoorthy.
3. Direct the respondents to grant fixation of pay, by stepping up the pay of the applicants on par with the pay of R. Krishnamoorthy.
4. Direct the respondents to grant all service entitlements by counting their service from the date on which R. Krishnamoorthy was appointed as Floor Assistants and grant consequential benefits like financial upgradation under MACP and promotions.
5. Any other further relief or order as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice.
6. Award the cost of these proceedings."
2. The applicants were initially engaged as Casual Floor Assistants with effect from 1.9.1988 to March, 1990 with the respondents. They have claimed to have worked with the respondents for 211 days and 190 days respectively. They were not called for regular appointment as Floor Assistants. They filed Original Application No. 522 of 1989 when they were not permitted to participate in the written test and this Tribunal on 13 th June, 1990 disposed of the OA directing the respondents to participate them in the written examination and final interview. After declaration of the result they were not selected. They have secured 107 and 79 marks respectively. The candidates who were empaneled had secured minimum marks of 124 and 3 above. After several round of litigation filed on the side of the applicants the matter went to Hon'ble High Court and ultimately the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The applicants were successful in getting the posts of Floor Assistants with the respondents vide orders dated 21.11.2013 and 20.8.2013 respectively [Annexures A16(a) & A16] after granting them the requisite age relaxation as per the revised liberalized scheme of regularization by the respondents. Now both the applicants have put forth their case for similar treatment as given to one Shri R. Krishnamoorthy who was also appointed as Floor Assistant as per Annexure A4 vide order dated 15.10.1992. They also requests for fixation of pay, stepping up for pay, etc.
3. Notices were issued and respondents put appearance through Mr. N. Anilkumar, Sr. PCGC (R). They filed a detailed reply statement. The crux of the reply statement is that applicants were not having the requisite experience i.e. 120 days in one calendar year for getting regularization. Secondly they over averaged for which they have written to the competent authority to get age relaxation. Thereafter after age relaxation they have been appointed on the said post. Further it is submitted that the applicants are comparing their case with Shri M.S. Ajikumar and Shri R. Krishnamoorthy as per Annexures A21(a) and A21(b) respectively. It was further submitted that pay and allowances cannot be compared by the applicants with that of Shri M.S. Ajikumar and Shri R. Krishnamoorthy as they were directly recruited and not on the basis of regularization. The applicants were recruited as Floor Assistants after relaxation of age limit. The respondents further submitted that Shri B. Sreekumar is not the co-applicant as claimed by applicant No. 1 4 in Annexure A18. They pray for dismissal of the OA.
4. Heard Mr. Vishnu S. Chempazhanthiyil, learned counsel for the applicants and learned Sr. Central Government Standing Counsel (Retainer) appearing for the respondents. Perused the records.
5. It is true that applicants have to fight for their rights for more than two decades but the fact remains that they were not eligible for regularization untill their age criteria is relaxed as per the relevant Recruitment Rules. The matter went up to the apex court where the orders of this Tribunal were not found favour to the extent of giving benefits to the applicants. Ultimately this Tribunal has once again directed respondents to consider the case of the applicants for relaxation in future vacancies and the same has been done with effect from 21.8.2013. Now the crucial point raised by the applicants in the OA is that their case is similar to Shri R. Krishnamoorthy and others as they were directly recruited prior to the applicant and as per the OM letter dated 11.6.2010 [Annexure R1(a)/2] it clarifies that the service rendered on ad hoc basis in the grade concerned would not count for seniority in that grade and for eligibility for promotion to the next higher grade. It is well settled law that the casual service of the applicants would be considered for all purposes except seniority. The applicants cannot claim parity with Shri R. Krishnamoorthy and others as they were directly recruited with the respondents with effect from 15.10.1992.
5
6. The claim of the applicants fails before this Tribunal because the applicants were initially not eligible for getting employment as they have failed in the departmental examination and when their services were to be regularized they were found to be over aged. However, the respondents have considered them for relaxing the age limit under the liberalized scheme with effect from 21.8.2013.
7. In view of the above we find no merit in this OA and accordingly, the Original Application is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(ASHISH KALIA) (E.K. BHARAT BHUSHAN)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
"SA"
6
Original Application No.180/00866/2015
List of Annexures of the applicants
Annexure A-1 - True copy of the communication No.
DDK/TVM-2(6)/88-P/1099 dated 06.08.1988
issued to the 2nd respondent.
Annexure A-2 - True copy of the interim order dated 01.09.1989 in
O.A. No. 522/1989 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-3 - True copy of the order dated 10.02.1992 in O.A.
No. 53/1991 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-4 - True copy of the order No. 2(6)92-AI/DKT dated
15.10.1992 issued by the Administrative Officer for the 3rd respondent - Director.
Annexure A-5 - True copy of the order dated 10.03.1993 in O.A. No. 1123/1992 of this Hon'ble Court.
Annexure A-6 - True copy of the order dated 14.03.1996 in Civil Appeal No. .... of 1996 of this Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Annexure A-7 - True copy of the order No. 12(1)95-AI/DKT(BS) dated 27.10.1995 issued by the 3rd respondent. Annexure A-8 - True copy of the order dated 28.03.1994 in O.A. No. 739/1993 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-9 - True copy of the Office Memorandum No. 2/52/93- SI (Vol.II) dated 16.01.1998 in respect of G. Sreekumar.
Annexure A-10 - True copy of communication dated 12.01.1998 issued by Standing Counsel for the Doordarshan. Annexure A-11 - True copy of the order dated 16.12.1999 in O.A. No. 1099/1997 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-12 - True copy of the judgment dated 23.08.2005 in O.A. 612/2002 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-13 - True copy of the judgment dated 01.10.2009 in W.P. (C) No. 25425/2006 of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala.
Annexure A-14 - True copy of the order dated 21.10.2011 in O.A. 7 No. 940/2010 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-15 - True copy of order in R.A. No. 62/2011 in O.A. No. 940/2010 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-16 - True copy of the order No. 12(1)/2013/A1/DKT/ (KPM) 8197 dated 20.08.2013 issued to the 2nd applicant.
Annexure A-16(a) - True copy of the order No. 12(1)/2013/A1/DKT/ (SKP) dated 21.11.2013 issued to the1st applicant. Annexure A-17 - True copy of the order in C.P.C No. 129/2012 in O.A. No. 940/2010 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A-18 - True copy of the representation dated 11.10.2013 to the 3rd respondent.
Annexure A-19 - True copy of the order No. 12(1) 2013/A1/DKT (KPS) dated 07.07.2014 issued by 4 th respondent to the 1st applicant.
Annexure A-20 - True copy of the Memorandum No. 12(1) 2013/ A1/ DKT(KPMN) dated 14.08.2014 issued by 4th respondent.
Annexure A-21 - True copy of the pay slip in respect of B. Sreekumar for the month of September, 2013.
Annexure A-21(a) - True copy of pay slip in respect of M.S. Ajikumar for the month of August, 2013.
Annexure A-21(b) - True copy of pay slip in respect of R. Krishnamoorthy for the month of August, 2013. Annexure A-22 - True copy of the pay slip in respect of 1 st applicant for the month of September, 2013.
Annexure A-23 - True copy of the result of the written test and interview held on 02.09.1989 and 04.11.1989 for the post of Floor Assistant.
Annexure A-24 - True copy of the order in CMP No. 68/2011 dated 04.10.2016 of the Hon'ble Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram.
Annexure A-25 - True copy of order dated 04.07.2017 issuing summons to one G. Sundaresan Pillai, working as Administrative Officer in DDK 8 Thiruvananthapuram and S. Ganesh working as UDC in DDK Thiruvananthapuram.
Annexure A-26 - True copy of O.M. No. 2(3)/86-SI dated 10.06.1992 issued by the 3rd respondent.
Annexure A-27 - True copy of O.M. No. 2(3)/86-SI dated 09.06.1992 issued by the 3rd respondent.
List of Annexures of the Respondents Annexure R-1 - A copy of letter No. 2/20/2002 SI (Vol.) dated 06.08.2013 of Director General, Doordarshan, New Delhi.
Annexure R-1(a) - True copy of the Office Memorandum No. 34- 17/2005-SI dated 22.07.2010 of Directorate General, Doordarshan, New Delhi.
Annexure R-1(b) - True copy of the Hon'ble Principal Bench CAT, Nw Delhi order dated 15.11.2016 in OA No. 1026/2015.
*************************