Central Administrative Tribunal - Lucknow
Arun Kumar Prajapati vs Union Of India on 10 December, 2024
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
LUCKNOW BENCH
Original Application No. 332/00344/2021
This, the 10th day of December, 2024
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR OJHA, MEMBER (J),
HON'BLE MR. PANKAJ KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
1. Arun Kumar Prajapati, aged about 63 years, S/o late Sobha
Ram, R/o 2/804 Vinay Khand-2, Gomti Nagar, Lucknbha,
Lucknow 226010 1.
2. Abdul Hakeem Khan aged about 61 years, S/o Late Abdul
Fafoor Khan, R/o 563/2/307 New Madeyganj, Sitapur Road,
Lucknow.
3. Ram Sharan, aged about 64 years, S/o late Ram Bharosey,
R/o 441 PT/278 Purana Topkhana, Bari Road, Balaganj,
Lucknow.
4. Virendra Kumar Ram, aged about 59 years, S/o late Nohar
Ram, R/o F-1/74 Rajajipuram, Lucknow, presently working as
SPM, Canal Colony Post Office, Lucknow.
5. Vinod Kumar Sharma, aged about 61 years, S/o late Satua
Narain Sharma Sharma, R/o E-311-312 Sector I LDA Colony,
Kanpur Road, Lucknow.
6. Suresh Singh Yadav, aged about 64 years, S/o late Paltoo
Singh Yadav, R/o 356/340/14 Ashok Vihar, Lucknow.
7. Shambhu Nath Sharma, aged about 58 years, S/o Sri Subba
Lal Sharma, R/o C/o SPM, Aminabad, Park SO, Lucknow.
8. Hori Lal, aged about 59 years, S/o late Sri Chhitoo, R/o E-
5/93 Rajajipuram, Lucknow, presently working as APM
Counter, New Hyderabad, Post Office, Lucknow.
9. Smt. Pranpati Devi, aged about 59 years and 07 months, W/o
Sri Ram Kewal, R/o 6/807 Vikas Nagar, Lucknow, presently
working as Mahanagar, Post Office, Lucknow.
10. Anirudh Kumar, aged about 64 years, S/o late Balram, R/o
E- 4155 Rajajipuram, Lucknow.
11. Dinesh Kumar, aged about 62 years, S/o Sri Jagdish
Chandra Verma, R/o 442/37/1 Janrailganj, Chowk, Lucknow
presently Working as PA (LSG), Chowk Head Post Office,
Lucknow.
12. Ms. Anshumati Verma, aged about 59 years, w/o Sri Kant
Ram, R/o 544/309 BH Ekta Nagar, Chowk, Lucknow.
13. Om Prakash Pandey, aged about 62 years, S/o Late Jagdish
Pandey, R/o 1/209 Ratan Khand, Sharda Nagar, Lucknow.
14. Chandra Mohan Srivastava, aged about 57 years, S/o late
Ram Chandra Srivastava, R/o 554/196 Chhota Barha,
Page 1 of 4
Alambagh, Lucknow presently working as APM, Daliganj, New
Hyderabad Post Office Lucknow.
15. Rajesh Kumar Chauhan, aged about 61 years, S/o Sri Raj
Bahadur Singh Chauhan, R/o Faizpur Post Jauhari, (Ghiror),
District Mainpuri.
16. Harish Chandra Verma, aged about 57 years, S/o late Sri
Ram Prasad, R/o Village & Post Belsar Via Gaur, District Basti,
presently working as Post Master Basti Head Office, Basti.
..Applicants
By Advocate: Shri Dharmendra Awasthi.
VERSUS
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of
Communication, Department of Posts, Government of India,
Dak Bhawan, New Delhi.
2. Director General of Posts, Department of Posts, Dak Bhawan,
Sansad Marg, New Delhi.110 001.
3. Chief Postmaster General, U.P. Circle, Lucknow 226 001.
4. Senior Superintendent of Posts Offices, Lucknow Division,
Lucknow.
5. Superintendent of Post Offices, Basti Division, Basti,
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Ms. Prayagmati Gupta.
ORDER
PER HON'BLE JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR OJHA, MEMBER (J) Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records.
2. Through this Original Application, applicants have prayed for the following relief (s):
"(a) to issue order/direction/in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to regularize the services of the applicants from the initial date of joining by counting the services rendered as RTP PA towards qualifying service for the purposes of all consequential benefits and also for purposes of granting financial up- gradation under Time Bound Promotion Scheme and Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme by revising the retiral benefits of the applicant as well as pension alongwith interest 8% per annum from the date of its due till the date of actual payment except applicant nos4, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14 and 16.
{b} to issue order/direction/in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the applicants, contained in Annexure no. 8, in Page 2 of 4 accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a time bound manner to be fixed by this Hon'ble Tribunal.
{c} issue such other order/direction which may be deemed just and proper in the circumstances of the case.
{d} allow the Original application with cost against the respondents in view of the facts and circumstances, legal provisions and Grounds raised in the Application."
3. At the outset, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal has decided the similar controversy involved in the present lis vide order dated 15.04.2015 in OA No. 779-780 of 2013 [K Manohara and Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.] which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Telangana High Court in Writ Petition No. 17400 and 17425 of 2016 by means of judgment and order dated 17.02.2023. The SLP preferred against the order of the Hon'ble Telangana High Court has also dismissed on 29.05.2024.
Further submitted that the similar case has also been decided by Principal Bench of this Tribunal in September 2023 in OA No. 3466 of 2023; Rakesh Pal Singh vs. Union of India & Ors., hence, this OA may also be decided in terms of the order dated 15.04.2015 passed in OA No. 779-780 of 2013 [K Manohara and Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.] by Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal and the judgment and order passed in OA No. 3466 of 2023; Rakesh Pal Singh vs. Union of India & Ors. by Principal Bench of this Tribunal in September 2023.
4. The copies of the aforesaid judgments of the Tribunal, Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Apex Court have been filed through MA No. 2967 of 2024.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents orally opposed the aforesaid submissions, however, conceded the aforesaid facts.
6. In view of above, this OA i.e. 344 of 2021 is decided in terms of the order dated 15.04.2015 passed in OA No. 779-780 of 2013 [K Manohara and Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors.] by Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal and judgment and order passed in OA No. 3466 of 2023; Rakesh Pal Singh vs. Union of India & Ors. by Principal Bench of this Tribunal in September 2023
7. For avoidance of doubts, it is clarified that respondents / competent authority shall verify whether the facts of this OA and Page 3 of 4 OA No. 779-780 of 2013 and OA No. 3466 of 2023, which have been decided by Hyderabad and Principal Bench of this Tribunal vide order dated 15.04.2015 & in September, 2023 respectively are similar or not.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending MAs, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.
(Pankaj Kumar) (Justice Anil Kumar Ojha)
Member (A) Member (J)
Digitally signed by
Jay Narayan Singh
Date: 2024.12.11
'15:24:25 +05'30
Page 4 of 4