Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Madhab Maity vs D/O India Post on 30 September, 2020
1 0A/350/798/2d2O
0 i
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ii
KOLKATA BENCH
t
' O.A./350/798/2020 Date of Order: 30.09.2020
Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member
Hon'ble Mr. Tarun Shridhar, Administrative Member
Madhab Maity, Son of Sudhir Chandra Maity,
Aged about 50 years. Residing at Village- Gumai,
Post Office- Kapasda, Police Station- Sabang, ■
Dist- .Paschim Midnapore, Pin-721144 and. V.T
working to the post of GDSMD at Kapasda Branch,
Post Office- Sabang Sub-post office. Pin- 721144
in the Midnapore Division under the
Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,
Midnapore Division, Midnapore.
... Applicant
i VERSUS-
1. Union of India,
Service through the Secretary,
Government of India,
Ministry of Communication & Information
Technology,
Department of Posts,
20, Sanchar Bhawan,
■ Ashoka Road,
New Delhi-110 001.
2. The Chief Post Master General,
West Bengal Circle,
Yogayog Bhawarv
C.R. Avenue,
Kolkata - 700 012.
3. The Post Master General,
{
South Bengal Region,
Yogayog Bhawan,
Kolkata-700 012.
$
N
J
•.ie
/ 2 >< ••. OA/350/798/2O2Q
d
4. The Additional Director of Postal Services, .
West Bengal Circle,
4
South Bengal Region,
Yogayog Bhawan,
C.R. Avenue,
Kolkata-700 012. ....
!
5. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,
Midnapore Division,
Midnapore-721101.
6. The Inspector of Posts,
Ghatal Sub-Division;'
Ghatal-721212, '
District - Midnapore.
7. The Sub'Divisional Inspector (P),
Department of Posts, . -3
Ghatal Sub-Division,
Ghatal-721212,
District- Midnapore. ....
8. The Senior Postmaster,
Midnapore Head Post Office,
Midnapore-721101.
Respondents
For the Applicants Mr. P.C. Das, Counsel
Ms. T. Maity/Cpunsel
For the Respondents Ms. D. Nag, Counsel
ORDER (Oral)
3 Per Ms. Bidisha Baneriee, Judicial Member: * ;■ The applicant in the instant O.A. is reportedly discharging duties ooaa functions in the vacant post of GDSBPM/GDSMD in Kapasda Branch Post Officer 3 / 3 OA/350/798/2020 V ' & The applicant is aggrieved with the fact, that,-despite discharging such * duties in compliance to orders of higher authorities, he was deprived of appropriate pay and allowances and has hence approached this Tribunal witn the instant O.A.
2. The relief, in particular, as sought for in the O.A., is as follows:-
i "a) To pass an appropriate order directing upon the respondent authority to disburse the actual pay and allowances in connection to the post of GDSBPM/GDSMD which your applicant discharging which is a vacant post as per the direction of the respondent authority which is appearing, at Annexure A-l of this original application and to give the benefit of pay with effect from 14.03.2016 in respect of TRCA (Time-Related-Contlrt c/fty i Allowance) which was less paid and the arrear Bonus of 2016-1Z arid arrear payment of 7th CPC as per the Report of Kamlesh Chandra Committee in favour of the applicant along with all consequential benefits which your applicant is regarding for entitled to;
II b) To pass an appropriate order directing upon the respondent authority 8 not to reduce your applicant's pay and allowances and to give the benefit of pay in favour of the applicant who is discharging duties and fuJ^ction against a vacant post as per the direction of the higher authority of the respondents being Annexure A-l of this original application along with oil consequential benefits in the Jig hi' of the decision passed by this Ho^n'Jbie Tribunal in the case of Radhashyam Das -vs- Union of India & Ors. /jn 0>A No. 350/1376 of 2018 being Annexure A-3 and there is another recent decision passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in OA. 350/638/202*0 on 04.09.2020 whereby this Hon'ble Tribunal has been pleased to ront ■> similar relief to that applicant in light of the decision of Radhashyarh Dos case, being Annexure A-5 of this original application and in the light of the implementation order issued by the same Division of Post Offices doted 13.12.2018 being Annexure A-4 of this original application."
3. Heard both Id. Counsel, examined documents on record. This matter is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.
4. The su omissions of Ld. Counsel for the applicant are that the applicant was directed from time to time by his higher authorities to discharge duties a nd responsibilities in the vacant posts of GDSBPM/GDSMA at Kapasda Branch Post:
Office.
r 4 OA/350/798/2020 V • e The ap )licant would contend that he is entitled to appropriate payme rvt of TRCA, arrear bonus of 2016-17, as well as arrears of 7th CPC as per the report of the Kamlesh Chandra Committee. The respondent authorities, however, not* only deprived the applicant of such amounts but also reduced the applicant's pay by c* more than Rs. 4000/- per month w.e.f. 31.12.2016 in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner. The applicant represented to the competent respor dent authority, who, however, failed to decide on the same.
The applicant would further aver that, an identical issue was contained in O.A. No. 350/01376/2018 (Radhashyam Das v. Union of India & ors.) which was disposed of |by the Tribunal vide orders dated 28.9.2018.and, in compliance thereof, the Office of the respondent No. 5, who is the Sr. Superintendent of Post X Offices, had decided in favour of Shri Radhashyam Das and had disbursed a "rea r payments to Shri Radhashyam Das (Annexure A-4 to the O.A.) concluding, as \' follows:-
v' "6. In the view of the above, it has been decided that the benefit of own TRCA i|.e. Rs. 4830/- is admissible To Sri Das while he was working as GDS BPM Ratechak B.O. since 28.3.2015. Thus the concerned D.D.O. i.e. Sr. I Postmaster, Midnapore H.O. is hereby directed to take up the matter separately not in general i.e. it would be applicable only to the appl cant (Sri Das) and settle the case immediately. The representation c ated 16.5.2017 preferred by Sri Radhashyam Das, GDSBPM, Taladiha B.O. is !.
accordingly disposed of."
5. Ld. Counsel for the applicant would, therefore, urge that, as the applica nt has represented seeking similar benefits as granted to Shri Radhashyam Das, the concerned respondent authority be directed to consider his representation at i Annexure A-2.to the O.A., in the light of decisions in the matter of Sri Radhashya m Das. I * * v-C'.
: V' 5 0A/3S0/798/2O2O f &
6. Ld. Cpunsel for the respondents'would not object to disposal 0^ such representation in accordance with law, subject to similarity of circumstances \A/i*th Shri Radhashyam Das.
7. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the matter, and, with the consent of the parties, we would hereby direct the concerned responderi't authority to decide on the said representation (if received at his end), and, -in accordance with law, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of recei at of a copy of this order. v* The concerned respondent authority should convey his decision in the form v?
of a reasoned and speaking order to the applicant.
In the event that nothing stands in the way, and if the applicant is able to conclusively establish his claim of parity with Shri Radhashyam Dc s. the responden authority shall further decide on his entitlements and arrange to disburse the same within a further period of 8 weeks thereafter.
8. With these directions, the O.A. is disposed of. No costs.
(Torun Shhdhar)
K.-rL1
Member (A) Member(J)
pd
v7
<■*