Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sukhvinder vs Deptt Of Posts on 13 April, 2023
1
O.A. No.2001/2022 with OA No.2431/2022
Item No.13
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi
O.A. 2001/2022
With
O.A. No.2431/2022
This the 13th day of April, 2023
Hon'ble Mr. R N Singh, Member (J)
Hon'ble Mr. Sanjeeva Kumar, Member (A)
OA No.2001/2022
Shri Sukhvinder
S/o Jaibir Singh,
R/o H.No.17-C, Gali No.9,
Near BD School, Azad Nagar,
Panipat, Haryana-132103
Group C posted as Sorting Assistant,
RMS AM Division Ahemadabad-380009.
...Applicant
(By advocate : Shri Vishwa Pal Singh with Shri Ashish
Pandey and Shri Prateek Rai)
Versus
1. Union of India,
Min. Of Communication & Information
Technology, Department of Posts through its
Secretary,
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi-110001.
2. The Director General of Posts (Recruitment
Division),
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi-110001.
3. Sr. Superintendent Post Offices,
RMS AM-Division, Ahmedabad-380009.
...Respondents
(By Advocate : Shri Dilbagh Singh )
2
O.A. No.2001/2022 with OA No.2431/2022
Item No.13
OA No.2431/2022
Amit Aged about 28 years,
S/o Sh. Satbir
VPO Panchi Jattan,
Distt. Sonipat, Haryana-131301.
Presently at Delhi
(Group C Post as Postman/Mail Guard)
...Applicant
(By advocate : Shri Yogesh Kumar Mahur with Shri
Harkesh Parashar)
Versus
1. Union of India, through the Secretary,
Ministry of Communication and Information
Technology,
Department of Post,
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi-110001.
2. The Additional Director General (DE),
Department of Posts (DE Section),
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi-110001.
3. The Chief Post Master General,
Chhattisgarh Circle Raipur office,
Durg Division, Bhilai,
Chhattisgarh-490006.
...Respondents
(By Advocate : Shri R.S. Rana )
3
O.A. No.2001/2022 with OA No.2431/2022
Item No.13
O R D E R (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. R N Singh, Member (J):
The issue involved in the captioned OAs is stated to be common, the grounds urged on behalf of the parties are also common and the reliefs sought by the applicants are similar. In the background of such admitted position, with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the captioned OAs have been heard together and are being disposed of by the present common order. However, for the sake convenience, OA No.2431/2022 has been treated as a lead case and facts are being taken from the pleadings therein.
2. The applicant has challenged the order dated 10.05.2022, vide which, the applicant's representation dated 27.09.2021 has been rejected, keeping in view the CFSL report, in which it has been stated that applicant's signature on the OMR sheet did not match with the specimen signature. The applicant has prayed for the following relief(s) :-
"i) Quash and set aside the Impugned Order No.B2-18/PA/Direct Rectt/2013 & 2014 dated 10.05.2022 vide which 4 O.A. No.2001/2022 with OA No.2431/2022 Item No.13 the applicant's representation dated 27.09.2021 has been rejected on the basis of CFSL report vide which it has been ruled that the applicant's signature on the OMR sheet did not match with specimen signature and hence the offer of appointment has been cancelled.
ii) Direct the respondents to allow the applicant to join to the Post of Postal Assistant/Sorting Assistant with full back wages and all consequential benefits.
iii) To kindly extend the benefit of order dated 10.03.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. 2756/2019 Sanjeev Kumar etc.
iv) Any other relief the Hon'ble tribunal deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
3. Pursuant to notice, the respondents have filed counter reply and they have opposed the claim of the applicant and prayed for the dismissal of the OA. The applicant has chosen not to file any rejoinder. However, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the issue involved in the present OA is squarely covered by the order/judgment of the Tribunal dated 30.05.2021 in OA No.2444/2021 titled Sumit Surajmal Vs. UOI with connected OAs and the said judgment of the Tribunal has attained finality inasmuch as the SLP filed in the 5 O.A. No.2001/2022 with OA No.2431/2022 Item No.13 said matter has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that following order of the Tribunal in Sumit Surajmal (Supra), this Tribunal has further allowed identical claim of the applicants in various OAs i.e. OA No.2241/2022, OA No.2226/2022 and OA No.2222/2022 vide common order dated 20.03.2023.
5. Learned counsels appearing for the respondents did not dispute that the issue involved in the present case is identical to that in the case of Sumit Surajmal and also in the aforesaid three OAs. However, learned counsels appearing for the respondents submit that the respondents have filed various Writ Petitions against order(s) of this Tribunal before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on the similar issue and many such Writ Petitions are still lying pending consideration of the Hon'ble High Court and are scheduled for hearing on 09.05.2023. However, the learned counsels for the respondents did not dispute that the issue identical in Sumit Surajmal has attained finality.
6
O.A. No.2001/2022 with OA No.2431/2022 Item No.13
6. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, we do not find any reason to deviate from what has been ordered in the Sumit Surajmal (supra) and in the common order dated 20.03.2023 in the aforesaid three OAs by this Tribunal. Para 6 of the common order dated 20.03.2023 in the aforesaid three OAs reads as under:-
"6. In view of the aforesaid, the OA is partly allowed. The impugned orders of termination are set aside. The respondents are directed to re-instate the applicants. The applicants shall be entitled for consequential benefits in accordance with rules and instructions. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed by the respondents as expeditiously as possible and preferably within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed against the applicants, if they are so decide in accordance with relevant rules and instructions. However, in the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. A copy of the order may be placed on the files of the aforesaid OAs."
7. In view of the aforesaid, the captioned OAs are partly allowed. The impugned orders of termination are set aside. The respondents are directed to re- instate the applicants. The applicants shall be entitled for consequential benefits, in accordance with rules and instructions on the subject. The aforesaid 7 O.A. No.2001/2022 with OA No.2431/2022 Item No.13 exercise shall be completed by the respondents as expeditiously as possible and preferably within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed against the applicants, if they so desire, in accordance with relevant rules and instructions. However, in the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.
A copy of this order may be placed in case files of both the OAs.
( Sanjeeva Kumar ) ( R.N. Singh )
Member (A) Member (J)
/rk/