Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore
Vinayak Ramachandra Bhat vs Deptt Of Posts on 12 July, 2024
1
O.A.No.170/167/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/00167/2023
DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF JULY, 2024
CORAM:
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE DR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
Vinayak Ramachandra Bhat
S/o Ramachandra V.Bhat
Aged 54 years
Working as GDS BPM
Kalleshwar BO - 581314
A/w Ankola MDG
Karwar Postal Dn
Karwar - 581 301
Residing at: Kalleshwar - 581 314
Ankola Taluk ...Applicant
(By Advocate Shri P.Kamalesan)
Vs.
1. Union of India
Reptd by Secretary
Department of Post
Dak Bhavan
New Delhi - 11001
2. Chief Post Master General
Karnataka Circle
2
O.A.No.170/167/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
Bangalore-560 001
3. Director of Postal Services
N.K.Region
Dharwad - 580 001
4. Superintendent of Post Offices
Karwar Postal Dn
Karwar - 581 301
...Respondents
(By Shri N.Amaresh for R 1 to 4)
O R D E R (ORAL)
PER: DR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
This Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal's Act. 1985 seeking the following relief:
i) Quash the superintendent of post offices, Karwar Dn, Karwar-581301 letter No.KWR/B2-1796/Kalleshwar BO/ dated 17.2.2021 issued by respondent no.4.
ii) Quash the superintendent of post offices, Karwar Dn, Karwar - 581 301 letter No.KWR/B2-1796/Kalleshwar BO/20221 dated 22.11.2021 Annexure A6 issued by respondent No.4
iii) Quash Government of India, Ministry of Communication & IT Department of Post (establishment Division) Dak Bhavan, new Delhi letter file No.19-10/2004-GDS (Part) dated 21/22-7-2010 vide Annexure A7 issued by respondent No.1.3
O.A.No.170/167/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
iv) Consequently direct the respondent to grant pay protection to the applicant on transfer within the same recruitment unit, as per orders of Hon'ble CAT Ernakulam full bench order dated 14.11.2008 in O.A 270/2006/O.A 493/2007, & O.A 349/2007 Annexure A-9 and Hon'ble High Court of Kerala order dated 12.1.2012 in W.P No.13112/2009 vide Annexure A10 with all consequential benefits, from the date of transfer to new unit.
v) Grant any other relief as deemed fit into the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. "
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was working as GDS MD/MC Heggar RC a/w Ankola MDG and was transferred as GDS BPM Kalleshwar BO a/w Ankola MDG under Karwar Dn, on 30.7.2014. The above transfer order incorporated a condition stating that the pay of new post shall be regulated as per guidelines issued by the Department of Post by letter No.19-10/2004 GDS(Part) dated 21.7.2010. The applicant's TRCA was fixed as Rs.2745/- Basic Pay and Rs.2937/- as Dearness Allowance vide pay slip of applicant for the month of October 2014. The applicant's Basic Pay was Rs.4140 and Dearness Allowance 4110/- before transfer vide pay slip of applicant for the month of June 2014. The applicant obtained information through RTI from SPOS 4 O.A.No.170/167/2023/CAT/BANGALORE Thiruvananthapuram Dn, Kerala, wherein on identical facts TRCA protection was granted to the GDS employees. The applicant submitted representation/appeal which was rejected. On identical facts of the case, the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam granted relief by ordering that 'GDS employee seeking transfer within the same recruitment unit is entitled to retain his TRCA intact and the order of Hon'ble C.A.T Ernakulam bench was confirmed by Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in WPC No.13112/2009. The same was also confirmed by the Apex Court. The applicants in O.As in Kerala Circle were granted relief and the said issue has attained finality. It is submitted that the applicant is also a similarly placed employee and he is entitled to the same benefit and cannot be discriminated against.
3. On notice, respondents have filed their reply statement and no rejoinder has been filed.
4. When the case came up for final hearing on 12.7.2024, learned counsel Shri.P.Kamalesan for the applicant and Shri.N.Amaresh for the respondents were present and heard. 5
O.A.No.170/167/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
5. We have carefully gone through the record and considered the rival contentions of both parties.
6. From the record, it is evident that the facts of the case of the applicant are identical to the case in O.A No.270/2006 and connected matters, wherein a Full Bench consisting of three Members of the Ernakulam Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal, vide their order dated 14.11.2008 have ruled that:
"49. Now, the entire situation would be summarized and references duly answered as under:
(a) As per the rules themselves, in so far as transfer within recruitment unit and in the same post with identical TRCA, there shall be no depletion in the quantum of TRCA drawn by the transferred individual.
(b) In so far as transfer from one post to the same Post with Diff. TRCA and within the same Recruitment Unit, administrative instructions provide for protection of the same vide order dated 11th October, 2004, subject only to the maximum of the TRCA in the transferred unit (i.e. maximum in the lower TRCA)
(c) In so far as transfer from one post to a Different Post but with same TRCA and within the same Recruitment Unit, as in the case of
(a) above, protection of TRCA is admissible.6
O.A.No.170/167/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
(d) In respect of transfer from one post to another within the same recruitment unit but with different TRCA (i.e. from higher to lower), pay protection on the same lines as in respect of
(b) above would be available.
(e) In so far as transfer from a post carrying lower TRCA to the same category or another category, but carrying higher TRCA, the very transfer itself is not permissible as held by the High Court in the case of Senior Superintendent of Post Offices vs. Raji Mol, 2004(1) KLT 183. ."
7. The said order of the Central Administrative Tribunal was challenged in Writ Petition No.13112 of 2009 (Z) wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala vide their judgment dated 12th January 2012 dismissed the Writ Petition and the judgment of the Full Bench of the C.A.T Ernakulam Bench was not interfered with. The same was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) CC 21656- 21666/2012 from various judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala and wherein the Court ruled as follows:
" Delay condoned.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere. The special leave petitions are dismissed."7
O.A.No.170/167/2023/CAT/BANGALORE
8. Hence, the issue attained finality. As the facts of the case of the applicant are same as that of the applicants in the said Original Application Nos. 270/2006, 493/2007 and 349/2007 filed before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, which is confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the applicant also deserves to get the benefits as provided to the applicants in the above-cited O.As. Hence the respondents have no right to dis-allow the representation/appeal submitted by the applicant. Hence we pass the following orders:-
The impugned orders at Annexure A4, A6 and A7 are set aside issued by the respective respondents. The respondents are directed to consider the order dated 14.11.2008 of the Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench in Original Application Nos.270/2006, 493/2007 and 349/2007 confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala dated 12.01.2012 in WP No.13112/2009 and further confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP Diary No.34328/2012 and extend the pay protection to the applicant in the light of the said judgment from the date 8 O.A.No.170/167/2023/CAT/BANGALORE of his representation dated 03.07.2020 (Annexure A3) by passing an appropriate order in an expedite manner in any event not later than 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
9. Accordingly, the Original Application stands allowed. All associated M.As are accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs.
(DR. SANJIV KUMAR) (JUSTICE S. SUJATHA)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
/SV/