Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Ram Brahma Nayak vs D/O India Post on 3 October, 2018
CENTRAL ADMHSTRAVE TRIBUNAL Date of order: 03.10.2018 No. OA. 350/570/2014 Present Hon'ble Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member Hon'ble Dr. Nandita Chatterjee, Administrative Member Sri Ram Brahma Nayak, son of late Bijoy Krishna Nayak, residing at Village and Post Office - Ladda Brahmandiha B.O, Police Station- Taldangra, District- Bankura, Pin- 722 152, aged about 66 years, retired as GDSBPM Ladda Brahmandiha B. 0.
Applicant.
-versus-
1.. Uii.Oridf1ri thr:oiiigh the Secretary, M:iristfy:of6ômmuniIcatiOn, Department Of Post DäkBhawan, New Delhi- 110 001 The Chief Postm•aster General, West Bengal Circle, YogayogBhawan, Kolkata- 700 012.
The Postmaster General, South Bengal Region Yogayog Bhawan, 12, C. R. Avenue, Kolkata- 700 012.
The Director of Postal Services, South Bengal Revision, 12, C. R. Avenue, Kolkata- 700 012.
The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Bankura Division, Bankura- 722 101.
The Senior Postmaster, Bankura Head Post Office, Bankura- 722 101.
Respondents.
For the Applicant Mr. B. K. Chatterjee, Counsel For the Respondents Mr. M. K. Ghara, Counsel el 2 Per Ms. Bidisha Banejee, Judicial Member:
Ld. counsel for applicant alleges that the applicant is entitled to get the TRCA-revised pay in terms of the G.l., Dept. of Pbsts, letter No. 6-1/2009-P.F.-ll, dated 09.10.2009 which is reproduced as under:
"Basic TRCA as on 01.01.2006 + 5% increase as on 01.04.2004 multiplied by a factor of 1.74 and then adding 40% fitment as arrived at the 20th stage of pre-revised TRCA and fixation at next above the stage in the revised slab of Time Related Continuity Allowance."
2. Per contra, Id. Counsel for respondents submitted that the applicant who is already serving as a School Teacher, is not entitled to the said benefits due to following reasons:
"that, there was no sepraté provision in GDS pay commission for TRCA fixation of School Teacher 1 BPMs. I School teacher BPMs are not entitled to get Dearness AlIowa:ne: irGOS pay ãommission, it was ordered to fix pay of GDS by multipyin abFRCA withja factor 1.74 as there was 74% Dearness Allowance..atthatJm,. It wa, not stated in the order, whether, for the GDS who 'did not getDearñess Allowance, Basic TRCA will be multiplied by some other factor (instead of 1.74) because the factor 1.74 incorporates Dearness Allowance. Hence, for the instant case, the TRCA of Sri Rambrahma Nayak has been calculated taking into account the Dearness Allowance factor, multiplying the TRCA by 1.74, although, he was not entitled to get Dearness Allowance, as there was no other order/provisior to fix TRCA of School Teacher BPMs, in the GDS pay commission and his arrear was also calculated as if he has. been drawn Dearness Allowance, in both due & drawn side.
But, as Sri Nayak was actually not entitled to get Dearness Allowance, hence, his basic TRCA was reduced to Minimum of revised TRCA 3660-70- 5760 w.e.f. 1.1.2010 (upto December 09, he has been paid arrear), allowing fOur increment @ Rs.70/-, basic TRCA drawn w.e.f. 1.1.2010 is Rs. 3940/-. Accordingly arrear calculation has been revised and calculated without DA for the entire period from 1.1.2006 to 31.12.2009 and paid Rs. 67760/-. From Oct, 2009 to December, 09he was wrongly paid @Rs. 4850/- instead of @ Rs. 3870/- but later the same has been adjusted in arrear calculation.
In brief, TRCA fixed as on 1.1.2006=Rs. 3660/- as per fixation formula withOut allowing 74% DA as he was not entitled to DA.91 3
Since the applicant has prayed for revision of TRCA whereas the denial is on the ground of non-admissibility of DA and the dispute is factual, we consider it fit to dispose of the OA with a direction upon therespondent no. 6 to give a personal hearing to the applicant with due notice and thereafter to consider his claim in the light of the Postal Department's Circular dated 09.10.2009, extracted supra, as well as any other relevant rules and circulars and issue a reasoned and speaking order accordingly within 2 months.
.jj The respondents shall clarify as to why the applicant 0ould not be entitled the benefits of the OM dated 09.10.2009 and on what basis 74% of DA has been included in the calculation at para 6.4 of the reply.
In case the applicant is founderititld to any of the benefits claimed in this OA, he shall be extended such 'apprp beQef its vithin a period of one month thereafter. The entire exercise shall bedThpletd within 3 months 6 Accordingly, OA would stand aisposeddf No costs (Dr. Nandita chatterjee) (Bidisha Banerjee) Member (A) Member (J) pd