Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Shrikrishan Pal vs Council Of Scientific And Industrial ... on 7 December, 2022
1
Item No. 07 O.A. No. 3973/2017
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi
O.A. No. 3979/2017
This the 07th day of December, 2022
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
1. Shrikrishan Pal S/o Late Shri Mohan Lal ,
aged about 54 years ,
working as Assistant Grade-II
working at National Physical Laboratory
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi- 110012
R/o A Block Gali No.24, House No.12,
Prem Nagar-III Kirari Delhi-110086
2. Jai Prakash ,
S/o Late Shri Harihar Mahtoo,
aged about 44 years ,
working as Work Assistant
working at National Physical Laboratory ,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012,
R/o A-229, Indira Enclave Phase-II,
Kirari Sulamannagar Delhi-86
3. Brahma Nand S/o Late Shri Kamal Singh ,
aged about 50 years ,
working as Work Assistant
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012,
R/o C-345,MadipurJ.J. Colony, Delhi-63
4. Bhag Narayan Singh S/o Late Shri Madan Singh,
aged about 53 years,
working as Work Assistant
working at National Physical Laboratory
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o F-477, Indira Enclave Phase-II,
Kirari Sulamannagar,
Delhi -86
5. Deep Chand Ram S/o Shri Rampati Ram ,
aged about 52 years,
working as Work Assistant
working at National Physical Laboratory ,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o B-11, N.P.L. Colony, New Rajinder Nagar,
New Delhi-60
2
Item No. 07 O.A. No. 3973/2017
6. Vishav Nath Ram S/o Shri Bipat Ram,
aged about 48 years,
working as Work Assistant
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o C-46, N.P.L. Colony,
New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-60
7. Ram Prakash S/o Shri Ganga Charan,
aged about 52 years ,
working as Lab Attendant ,
working at National Physical Laboratory
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o B-71, N.P.L. Colony,
New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-60
8. Suresh Ram S/o Late Shri Ramsharan Ram,
aged about 51 years,
working as Work Assistant
working at National Physical Laboratory
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o WZ-148,Todapur Bihari Colony, Delhi.
9. Subapal Singh S/o Shri Sumer Singh,
aged about 48 years,
working as Assistant Grade-III,
working at National Physical Laboratory
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012,
R/o B-48, N.P.L. Colony,
New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-60
10. Surendresh S/o Shri Balbir,
aged about 50 years,
working as Lab Attendant ,
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o House No. 950, Nagalkala Sonipat Haryana.
11. Inder Kant Raj S/o Shri Basudev Rai ,
aged about 49 years,
working as Work Assistant
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o C-48, N.P.L. Colony,
New Rajinder Nagar, NewDelhi-60
12. Ajit Singh S/o Shri Munshi Ram,
aged about 51 years,
working as Lab Attendant
3
Item No. 07 O.A. No. 3973/2017
working at National Physical Laboratory ,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o B-71, N.P.L. Colony,
New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-60.
13. Jagnnath Rai S/o Shri Sita Ram Rai ,
aged about 51 years,
working as Lab Attendant,
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012,
R/o WZ-148, Todapur Bihari Colony Delhi .
14. Umesh Thakur S/o Late Shri Sukhi Thakur,
aged about 50 years,
working as Work Assistant ,
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012,
R/o B-34, N.P.L. Colony,
New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-60
15. Rajender Thakur, S/o Late Shri Sukhdev Thakur,
aged about 52 years,
working as Work Assistant,
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012,
R/o B-6, N.P.L. Colony,
New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-60
16. Jitender Rao S/o Late Shri O.P. Yadav,
aged about 49 years,
working as Lab Attendant
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012,
R/o Village and P.O. Jaffarpur Kala New Delhi.
17. Ram Payare Yadav S/o Shri Ram Shanker Yadav ,
aged about 53 years ,
working as Work Assistant,
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o B-58, N.P.L. Colony,
New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-50
18. Ram Bahadur S/o Late Shri Dwarka Prasad ,
aged about 49 years,
working as Work Assistant ,
working at National Physical Laboratory
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o B-52, N.P.L, Colony,
4
Item No. 07 O.A. No. 3973/2017
New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi-60
19.Satyabir Singh S/o Late Shri Harbansh Singh,
aged about 59 years,
working as Work Assistant,
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr.K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012,
R/o Nagli Dairy House No. 53
Delhi .
20. Prideen S/o Late Sh. Khamai
Aged about 55 years,
working as Work Assistant,
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi- 110012
R/o B-60, N.P.L. Colony, New Rajinder Nagar,
New Delhi-60 .
21. Veer Singh S/0 Shri Kushal Pal Singh,
aged about 52 years,
working as Work Assistant
working at National Physical Laboratory
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012
R/o E-27, Mangolpuri New Delhi
22. Baij Nath Rai S/o Shri Sitaram Raj,
aged about 51 years,
working as Work Assistant,
working at National Physical Laboratory,
Dr. K.S. Krishnan Road, New Delhi-110012,
R/o WZ-148, Todapur Bihari Colony, Delhi
....Applicants
[By Advocate(s): Mr. Yogesh Sharma with
Ms. Vaishalii Sulkhlan]
Versus
1. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research
Through its Director General
Rafi Marg, New Delhi -110001
2. National Physical Laboratry
Through its Director
Pusa Road, New Delhi.
3. The Controller of Administration
National Physical Laboratory,
Pusa Road, New Delhi
...Respondents
[By Advocate(s): Ms. K. Iyer]
5
Item No. 07 O.A. No. 3973/2017
ORDER (ORAL)
This Original Application has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief(s):
"(a) Call for the records of the case;
(b) Pass an order directing respondents to admit the applicants to General Provident Fund and Old Pension Scheme at par with their juniors detailed in Annexure P-25 (Colly) by giving them the benefit of service under Respondent Nos. 3 at par with the said juniors;
(c) Pass such further or other orders which this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. The applicants are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 23.03.2017, whereby the department has issued a non-speaking order denying the grant of Old Pension Scheme qua the applicants.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants relies upon the OM dated 08.11.2011, wherein the similar situated persons/ juniors have been granted similar benefits, i.e., grant of temporary service and regularisation. He further relies upon the decision dated 13.05.2015 rendered by the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in OA No. 1549/2014, wherein similar reliefs have been granted.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants further contends that the office order dated 25.05.2017, the present 6 Item No. 07 O.A. No. 3973/2017 applicants are senior to 12 employees stated therein, who were regularised from the same date as that of applicant or subsequent dates. He further draws attention to Rule 14 CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Therefore, the applicants are entitled to counting of 50% of wages for the services rendered from the date of daily wager till regularisation.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents contends that present OA is barred by law of limitation inasmuch as they were regularised way back and now they have approached this Tribunal in the year 2017 and they have all the opportunity to seek the benefit of the same. She further relied on following judgments, wherein similar reliefs have been denied:-
(i) Nargendra Kumar Vs. Union of India through the Secretary & Ors. [2020(4) SLR 326] in W.P.(C) 1550 of 2020 decided on 12.02.2020 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.
(ii) Union of India & Ors. Vs. Dr. Narayan Rao Battu & Anr. [2019(4)AD(Delhi) 156] in W.P.(C) 10306 of 2016 decided on 27.03.2019 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi.7 Item No. 07 O.A. No. 3973/2017
6. Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the case laws relied upon by the respective counsel.
7. This Tribunal is of the opinion that so far the issue of limitation is concerned it is a settled law that the grant of pension is a recurring cause of action and is squarely covered by decision in Union of India Vs. Tarsem Singh.
8. Furthermore, it is important to know the decisions referred by learned counsel for the respondents are pertaining to direct recruits and therefore the same is not applicable to the facts of the past case. As can be seen the applicants themselves have challenged the impugned order, which came to be passed on 23.03.2017, which is a non- speaking order, which ought to have fall on the short point denial of claim by way of non-reasoned and non-speaking order. However having regard to facts and circumstances of the case, it is admitted position that it is for the first time there has been denial by the respondents to claim of the applicants qua the conversion from Old Pension Scheme to New Pension Scheme. Reference is drawn to Government of India's Decision under Rule 14 stipulates as under:-
"(2) Counting half of the service paid from contingencies with regular service. - Under Article 368 of the CSRs (Rule 14) periods of 8 Item No. 07 O.A. No. 3973/2017 service paid from contingencies do not count as qualifying service for pension. In some cases, employees paid from contingencies do not count as qualifying service for pension. In some cases, employees paid from contingencies are employed in types of work requiring services of whole-time workers and are paid on monthly rates of pay or daily rates computed and paid on monthly basis and on being found fit brought on to regular establishment. The question whether in such cases service paid from contingencies should be allowed to count for pension and if so, to what extent has been considered in the National Council and in pursuance of the recommendation of the Council, it has been decided that half the service paid from contingencies will be allowed to count towards pension at the time of absorption in regular employment subject to the following conditions, viz.:-
(a) Service paid from contingencies should have been in a job involving whole-time employment (and not part-time for a portion of day).
(b) Service paid from contingencies should be in atype of work or job for which regular posts could have been sanctioned, e.g., mails, chowkidars, khalasis, etc.
(c) The service should have been one for which the payment is made either on monthly or daily rates computed and paid on monthly basis and which though not analogous to the regular scale of pay should bear some relation in the matter of pay to those being paid for similar jobs being performed by staffs in regular establishments.
(d) The service paid from contingencies should have been continuous and followed by absorption in regular employment without a break.
(e) Subject to the above conditions being fulfilled, the weightage for past service paid from contingencies will be limited to 9 Item No. 07 O.A. No. 3973/2017 the period after 1st Januar, 1961, for which authentic records of service may be available.
[G.I., M.F., O.M. No. F. 12 (1)-E. V/69, dated the 14th May, 1968.] It has been decided that half the service paid from contingencies will be allowed to be counted for the purpose of terminal gratuity as admissible under the CCS (TS) Rules, 1965, where the staff paid from contingencies is subsequently appointed on regular basis. The benefit will be subject to the conditions laid down in OM, dated the 14th May, 1968, above."
9. It is also noticed that no record is available with the department qua the employees mentioned at Annexure A-24 and A-25 and the same was accepted by this Tribunal. Since the record itself is not traceable that cannot be a ground to deny the benefit qua the applicants herein above. In a recent decision passed by this Tribunal in OA No. 1673/2020 titled Shakuntala Devi Vs Union of India, wherein the similar view has been taken. Hence, no divergent view can be taken in the present matter.
10. In view of the aforesaid, the OA is allowed with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicants in the light of Tribunal's decision passed in Shakuntala Devi (supra).
No order as to costs.
(Manish Garg) Member (J) /sm/