Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Ravi Kumar Saraf vs Union Of India Through Its Secretary on 2 August, 2013
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH CHANDIGARH O.A. NO. 1439/PB/2012 Reserved on: 31.07.2013 Pronounced on:02.08.2013 Coram: Honble Mr. Ranbir Singh, Member (A) Honble Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Member (J)
1.Ravi Kumar Saraf, Store Keeper Grade-III
2.Smt. Saroj Bala, Upper Divisional Clerk
3.Smt. Vinod Bala, Upper Divisional Clerk
4.Smt. Rano Devi, Upper Divisional Clerk
5.Smt. Anita Kumari, Upper Divisional Clerk
6.Sh. Verinder Kotru, Lower Divisional Clerk (Stores)
7.Sh. Ashok Kumar, Lower Divisional Clerk (Stores) (All working in the office of Area Deport Manager, Ministry of Defence, govt. of India, Canteen Stores, Department Pathankot (Punjab)
8. Smt. Pushpa Devi, Senior Grade Clerk, Office of Regional Manager (North), Ministry of Defence, govt. of India Canteen Stores Department, B.D. Bari Jammu. .Applicants Versus
1.Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, Parliament Street, New Delhi.
2.General Manager, Government of India, Ministry of Defence, Canteen Stores Department, ADELPHI 119, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020
3.Area Depot Manager, Government of India, Ministry of Defence, Canteen Stores Department, Pathankot (Punjab)
4.Regional Manager (North), Ministry of Defence, Govt. of India Canteen Stores Department, B.D. Bari Jammu. ..Respondents Present: Mr. Brajesh Mittal, counsel for the applicants Ms. Nimrat k. Gill, counsel for the respondents Order BY HONBLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER(J)
1. By means of the present O.A., the applicants have sought a direction from this Tribunal to direct the respondents to count their daily rated service by adding the same with their regular service as LDC for the grant of all financial benefits to them and further direct them to extend the benefit of judgments, Annexures A-1, A-2 and A-3 with the release of arrears on financial upgradation by considering the said benefit by counting daily rated LDC service.
2. The facts are not in dispute.
3. On the commencement of hearing, Mr. Brajesh Mittal, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the judgments (Annexure A-1 to A-3) upon which the applicants are placing reliance have been affirmed by the Honble High Court of Judicature at Bombay by dismissing a Writ Petition (L) No. 1202 of 2012, vide order dated 24.07.2013, preferred by the respondents. A copy thereof has been placed on record. On the basis thereof, he submits that the respondents may be directed to extend the same benefits to the applicants herein.
4. Ms. Nimrat K. Gill, learned counsel for the respondents, very fairly states at the Bar that the identical issue has already been put to rest by the Honble High Court of Judicature at Bombay by dismissing the Writ Petition filed by the Union of India. She only prays that let the respondents be granted sufficient time to implement the directions given in the above said writ petition.
5. We have gone through the pleadings and also the judgment of the Honble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition (L) No. 1202 of 2012 with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties and given a thoughtful consideration to the matter.
6. In view of the fact that the issue has already been settled by the Honble High Court of Judicature at Bombay by dismissing the Writ Petition filed by the Union of India, vide its order dated 24.07.2013, this O.A is allowed in the same terms and the applicants are held entitled to the same benefits. Let the above exercise be carried out within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. No costs.
(SANJEEV KAUSHIK) MEMBER (J) (RANBIR SINGH) MEMBER (A) PLACE: Chandigarh Dated: 02.08.2013 mw