Karnataka High Court
Devi vs The Chief Post Master on 2 November, 2010
Bench: V.G.Sabhahit, B.V.Nagarathna
!
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 2"" DAY OF NOVEMBER 2O1,B"--.,
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE V.G.SA£3hHAH,ITi,'_G.'V. A ' A
AND
THE HON'BLE MRSJUSTICE 'B}V:"i3J.AGA.F»{i_S.T:HN*AAV
WRIT PETITION NO.8S:O€>/20L)-4*' A
BETWEEN A A A A
DEVI, «
D/O. C.M. MUNIS.WAMY,~-- '
AGED ABOUT_.6E.«..Y'EARiS,
BCR(PA). S,,B.,c.,B; __BP.ANC:H,
BANGALORE. "
PETITIONER
(By SRI;BASAVARAIAGVEERABHADRA, ADV.,)
AND :_
E»-CHIEF POSTMASTER,
A A.BAN,GALO_'RE, GPO,
T' _.BANG.ALORE_;~ 550 001.
2'; Cl-AIIE-FAVAPOST MASTER GENERAL,
KARNATAKA CIRICLE,
BANGALORE -- 560 001.
3.. .T$:E UNION OF INDIA,
REP. BY ITS DIRECTOR GENERAL,
DERARMTMENT OF POSTS,
NEW DELHI -- 110 001.
RESPONDENTS
fie (By SRI C. SHASHI KANTHA, CGSC.,) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA RRAIING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 1H2.i09_f';;«0'01 IN OA. 29/2000 VIDE ANN~A SO FAR AS IT_REI.A"rE,S..'TO"g THE RESTICTION FOR PAYING was ARREARS lPA:\"«.Ai*§lf§ ORDER DATED 19.12.2000 IN RA,61/2002:vI:DE.,ANVNgBp\{« THE HON'BLE C.A.T. BANGALORE.
THIS PETITION cOMINE.,, ON'-IEOR*s§RELIM.1NARYS..i' HEARING THIS DAY, SA'e1;-IAHIT*-J_._,*~-_'MADE THE FOI.I.Ow1NG:--- _ 9 . ~.._QRDER' j, This writ petition.'i's'I»f.ilI€fd'~W»,t|9'ae"_ap"pvi"ieant in Original ApplicationitllNvO,..2$f3$i)OQ,"~.'_._t)eingwaggrieved by the order passed 'by, the Central»"iKd:rTi«iniStrative Tribunal (hereinafter called..',the4"'[:ribII"na'i-')vdated 17.09.2001, wherein the "~....,Tribu«na.--;"i'Iwt1ile aiiiolwing the application of the petitioner .,..hVereVi'n 'aiVrheVt:':.Iing the respondents to grant the applicant thleibenefiititsof promotion under the Time Bound One V1~.__*-Rromei:Ieh (TBOP) scheme with effect from 01.08.1991 and V."Vi;i'.«ere'after, under Biennial Cadre Review (BCR) scheme __with effect from 01.10.1991, has ordered that for the purpose of payment of arrears, the applicant shail be 3 entitled for the same only for the period starting one year prior to the date of filing of the Original appIicatViong:"'i.._e., from 13.01.2000.
2. The petitioner hereins file-dag. _ap'pgl.i.cati*o'n' = the Tribunal contending tha.t's.he isevnltitled beT§nefif::'K of promotion under the effect from 01.08.1991 and thereaifttswr, i£?~.C».i§"scgheme niith effect from 01.10.1993, and _th_é1isaiijah;a'sd..lb0é'g-fi"' denied to her though the sihwgilarlyi granted the said benefit by :the'iior;der\"caf t:he.'l_Tri'b'una"i, and the same has been complied _t it is'Ht'h'e"'case of the applicant that she was pitonjotion under the T809 scheme with effect
01. and thereafter, under BCR scheme with effect"f_ro~m 01.10.1991. The applicant was entitled to the V"0:"_Ai1en.égfit of the said scheme as she had put requisite nfumber of years of service.
Ll
4. The application was resisted by the respondents contending that the application is barredg by time and the applicant is not entitled to the.~«..be'n'e'l*il:j' sought for in the application and the applicati_o:n.Vis' _ be dismissed.
5. The Tribunal held that thee.'cont_e'rati'on"Vofgfhe respondents that the applicat_i_o--nz is be-!ated_ ahdA'V.ii_s«--vnot~~3filedui"
within the period of limitation___cVa'n.noVt_Vbe"acc.epteVcl and the same was rejected anda'p.pli--r:atjon""wjagA'i1e_ld to have been filed within time; The.*i"ri'bu'if!al';._ha\ri.n'_g to the facts of theca_se,VVVthe-l_gd"lthatnthe -applicant is entitled to the benefit ofc4_provm'ot.ion' the T80? scheme with effect frogn_§i&'01li08.199.lV:andithereafter, under BCR scheme with effect _fro.m:40«-1V.1O.1991. Further, the Tribunal has ordered th'a.t_«fo'r" purlpose of payment of arrears, the applicant sha"l*l be: entitled for the same only for the period starting '.or.e_ year prior to the date of filing of the Original "ap'pi'i"cation i.e., from 13.01.2000. The finding of the "Tribunal that the application was filed before the Tribunal within time and the applicant is entitled to benefit of the 5 TBOP scheme with effect from 01.08.1991 and thereafter, under BCR scheme with effect from 01.10.1991 has not been challenged by the respondents and where--fo~re;--«.:gt'he same has become finai and this writ petition is' ' applicant before the Tribunal contending T'rib_tiVna.i_ if was not justified in restricting the"14pai,i_rti~ent'ffof"
the period starting one yea_r'~.nextA'"beforefh-fi!i1jg"~of"the'-if appiication before the Tribuna|,....W~.__
6. We have heard.thef:.Iea'r"ried:fVcognsei appearing for the petition;-'r__and.=the-- appearing for the responderh. I 1 if
7.é"~-The V"--!e'aArn»ed*.;.'counsel appearing for the petitioner subh.i2t_tefd that the Tribunai, having heid that the time and the applicant - petitioner is 1"enVti.tied"to~v_..V.the"'benefit of TBOP scheme with effect from _ O1.if3'8.1v'9:9'1v"and thereafter, under BCR scheme with effect 01.10.1991, was not justified in restricting the payment of arrears for the period starting one year next "before fiiing of the appiication. The iearned counsei submitted that in identicai matter i.e., O.A. i\io.168/1999 f:
«J Q disposed of on 10.11.1999, where benefit was granted, the payment of arrears was not restricted to the period starting one year next before filing of the app|ica_'tio:'n--.9_a'nd the said order has become final. V V V
8. The learned cottnslelg 1'ap~peari_n'g respondent argued in suppoittvpf the"-order the'-9' Tribunal.
9. We have gi\}"e_n7.cas§eful'~.'jcons,§deration to the contentions of the learneid Vco_u_nseilv_ gaptaearing for the partie$"inV9'so...fa_r Vthe'~oV.r'deréo"f"the Tribunal impugned in the writ--0'ét.itiVon.: -
_1po. °'1~tg_is clear'=fro'm the material on record that the ofthe. Tr§'b'u'n'a"i'Vgranting the benefit of promotion scheme with effect from 01.08.1991 and thereafter.'9iunder BCR scheme with effect from 01.10.1991 '*.,and holdi-ng that the application was in time has become "'9--"'_Al"i.n:a'l""A_tas the same has not been challenged by the respondents. The material on record would further show that the applicant in 0.23.. No.168/1999, who was also similarly situated as that of the petitioner made the said application before the Tribunal and the Tribunal, dated 10.11.1999, granted the benefit, conferred upon the petitioner in this case. in the said O.A. i\lo.168/1999, the Trit'i:unalfivii.h'i'l.e'all'ow--i..r'i»g:_Hthe application of the applicant,' directed the resV«:.:on'dAent;s."to:3, pay the arrears of pay withinllvthlreernonths':frond1'f§the date of receipt of the order villas made regarding the within three months from ;_the':d'ate restriction was made arrears of pay to be paid and also, no cond-it_i:o'nggwasvvimposed that the arrears of pay had to be =paidfo'r tfie starting one year next before filing; of the ap'pl.i_cation:. No material is produced to show ifZtnatlllthgwgiei<--._passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No.168/I999 Al'data_d%.lA has been modified or; set aside and whe'refo~--re','viive hold that the direction issued by the ,Vgg."i'rii3/unai""to the effect that for the purpose of payment of glarrearls, the applicant ~ petitioner herein shall be entitled the same only for the period starting one year prior to the date of filing of the original application i.e., from 13.01.2000 is liabie to be set aside and accordingly, the same is set aside and it is ordered that the respV0ontients shat! pay the arrears of pay within three _ date of receipt of the certified copy of this_ord..e"r,,esteletding 2 the time taken for granting the ceirtifiedtécjofl/p.':4._' it 0 c .
Accordingw, the Writ pt;-t.ition iiVs._disposed"V'%o;.___ suma g V