Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Durgaprasad Harnarayan Tiwari vs M/O Communications on 29 January, 2026
1 OA No.656/2018
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI.
ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.656/2018
Dated this Thursday the 29th January, 2026
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Shri Krishna, Member (A)
Hon'ble Shri Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)
1. Durgaprasad Harnarayan Tiwari
Aged about:60 years,
Sub Postmaster HSG-I, Amravati
Camp SO, 444 602.
R/o Galli No.6, Near Asara Mata
Mandir, Benoda Road,
Yashoda Nagar No.2, Amravati
Tq. & Distt. Amravati. ... Applicant No.1
1. Apurva Purushottam Joshi
Widow of Purushottam Joshi (Applicant No.2)
Age : 58 years,
Legal representatives of
Purushottam Joshi Deceased employee.
2. Aishwarya Purushottam Joshi
Unmarried Daughter of Purushottam Joshi
Age 24 years
Legal representatives of
Purushottam Joshi Deceased employee
Residing at Pipeline Road, Savedi
Tq & Distt. Ahmednagar - 414 003. ... Legal heirs of
Applicant No.2
( By Advocate Ms. Priyanka Mehndiratta )
Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=
Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone=
30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13
d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER=
6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8
b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso
Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0
VERSUS
1. The Union of India through
The Secretary,
Ministry of Communications
Department of Posts,
2 OA No.656/2018
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Chief Post Master General,
Maharashtra Circle,
Mumbai - 400 001.
3. The Assistant Postmaster General (Staff)
O/o The Chief Post Master General,
Maharashtra Circle,
Mumbai - 400001. ... Respondents
(By Advocate Shri N.K. Rajpurohit)
Order reserved on : 24.12.2025
Order pronounced on:29.01.2026p
ORDER
Per: Mr. Shri Krishna, Member (A)
The applicants have filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:
(a) This Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to call for the records of the case from the respondents and after examining the same quash and set aside the impugned orders dated 07.12.2017 and Milan Jackson Alphanso Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document 12.12.2017 (Annexure A-1 and Annexure A-2) and orders dated 19.05.2017 (Annexure A-3 to Annexure A-5) to the extent of non grant of Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 arrears to the applicant, with consequential benefits.
(b) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to direct the respondents to allow all consequential benefits against all the three promotion orders issued on 19.05.2017 (A-3, A-4 & A-5) to both the applicants along with penal interest.3 OA No.656/2018
b(i) The Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to direct the respondents to grant arrears and allow the applicant No.2 to draw the consequential benefits attached to his three promotions, posthumously and give consequential benefits, monetary or otherwise; including re-fixation of pension accordingly.
(c)Any other and further order as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit in the nature and circumstances of the case be passed.
(d) Cost of the application be provided for."
2. During the pendency of the OA, the applicant No.2 has died. His legal representatives are now brought on record as MA was allowed by this Tribunal vide order dated 03.03.2023 as Applicant Nos.1 and 2.
3. Brief facts of the case, as stated in the OA, are that the applicant No.1 joined the Postal Department on 17.11.1982 and qualified the examination of Accountant in the year 1989. Late applicant No.2 joined the department on 04.12.1979 and qualified the examination of Accountant in the year 1987. Both of them were working in Accountant cadre till 19.05.2017. Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson Both of them were promoted on 03.05.2017 as per the 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 orders issued by the respondent No.2, to the following different cadres consequent upon review/supplementary DPC held on 03.05.217:-4 OA No.656/2018
(a) to LSG (NB) cadre on merit as per recruitment Rules of 1976 w.e.f. 03.01.1997, vide order NO.STA/9-19/LSG (NB)/Postal Unit/Review DPC/2015 dated 19.05.2017.
(b) to HSG II(NB) cadre on merit as per recruitment rules of 1976 w.e.f.01.01.2004 vide order No.STA/9-19/HSG II(NB)/Postal Unit/Review DPC/2015 dated 19.05.2017.
(c)to HSG I (NB) cadre on merit as per recruitment rules of 1976 w.e.f. 01.01.2004 vide order No.STA/9-19/HSG I(NB)/Postal Unit/Review DPC/2015 dated 19.05.2017.
3.1 It has been submitted that in seniority Shri S.J. Sail is junior to the applicants. His name appears in the seniority list at serial No.34 whereas the name of the first applicant appears at serial No.33 and that of the deceased applicant No.2 appears at serial No.10. This shows that Shri S.J. Sail is junior to the applicants. Some Accountants working in the Postal Department in Maharashtra Circle including Shri S.J. Sail filed Original Applications before this Tribunal Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso for consideration of their promotion as per Recruitment DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 Rules, 1976 in LSG(NB), HSG II(NB) and HSG I(NB) cadres. This Tribunal by a common order dated 25.02.2002 passed in OA Nos.225/95, 991/97, 718/97, 1001/97 and 497/2001 allowed the OAs and directed 'to 5 OA No.656/2018 consider the case of applicant on merit under statutory Rules of 1976 by holding a review DPC and if found suitable he should be promoted from the date of his immediate junior was promoted with all consequential benefits.' The above orders of this Tribunal were contested by the respondents before the Hon'ble High Court but later on the petition was withdrawn unconditionally on 28.01.2015. After this unconditional withdrawal, the orders of this Tribunal were implemented by the respondents by promoting the juniors to the applicants Shri S.J. Sail etc. on 07.06.2017 to the cadres of LSG (NB), HSG II(NB) and HSG I (NB) with all consequential benefits. For this, a review DPC was held on 11.05.2016. However, the names of the applicants, who were senior, were not considered.
3.2 It has been submitted that since their junior Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso Shri S.J. Jail had been placed in the same gradation DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 list, they also represented for their promotion. The applicants were promoted in all the three cadres with effect from the same dates as their junior Shri S.J. Sail was promoted. However, the major discrimination 6 OA No.656/2018 was made by the respondent No.2 while promoting the applicants notionally and denying them the payment of arrears. The applicants joined their respective posting seats as Sub-Postmaster (HSG-I) Amravati Camp and Postmaster (HSG-I) Shrirampur HO respectively.
However, the junior Shri S.J. Sail, who was awarded promotion with all consequential benefits, never joined his new posting. Still, he was paid arrears of pay.
3.3 It has been further submitted that the applicants filed representations dated 11.07.2017 and 25.10.2017 respectively to the respondent No.2 requesting for grant of arrears of pay. Their representations were rejected vide impugned orders dated 07.12.2017 and 12.12.2017 by the respondent No.2.
These were rejected without application of mind and without considering the claim of the applicants that Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso under similar circumstances Shri S.J. Sail, a junior DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 had been given the same benefits. The benefits were denied to the applicants without specifying any reasons or rules whatsoever. Arrears of pay cannot be granted on pick and choose basis in similar promotion orders. 7 OA No.656/2018 This is illegal, arbitrary, void ab initio and against the spirit of the Constitution of India. 3.4 It has been submitted that the benefits of arrears payments were allowed to the juniors of the applicants but the same have been denied to the applicants. The representations of the applicants have been mechanically rejected. Aggrieved by the above orders of the respondents, the applicants filed this OA.
4. After issuance of notice, the respondents have filed their affidavit in reply and contested the OA.
It has been submitted that both the applicants were promoted to the following Accountant cadre consequent upon review/supplementary DPC held on 03.05.2017 notionally and they will not be entitled for any arrears/financial implementation:
(i) The applicants were given Lower Selection Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso Grade(Norm Base) promotion on merit as per DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 Recruitment Rules 1976 w.e.f. 03.01.1997 vide C.O. Mumbai Memo No.STA/9-19/LSG (NB)/Postal unit/Review DPC/2015 dated 19.05.2017, with clear instructions that 'the pay of the officials may be fixed 8 OA No.656/2018 notionally from the date shown against their name and they will not be entitled for any arrears.
(ii) Higher Selection Grade II(NB) promotion w.e.f.
01.01.2004 vide Memo No.STA/9-19/HSG-II (NB)/Postal unit/Review DPC/2015 dated 19.05.2017 with clear instructions that 'the pay of the officials may be fixed notionally from the date shown against their name and they will not be entitled for any arrears.
(iii) Higher Selection Grade-I(NB) promotion w.e.f. 19.01.2006 vide Memo No.STA/9-19/HSG-I(NB)/Postal unit/Review DPC/2015 dated 19.05.2017 with clear instructions that 'the pay of the officials may be fixed notionally from the date shown against their name and they will not be entitled for any arrears. 4.1 It has been submitted that the applicant No.1 Shri D.H. Tiwari retired on 31.12.2017 on superannuation and applicant No.2 i.e. Shri P.S. Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso Joshi(now deceased employee) voluntarily retired on DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 03.04.2018 F/N. The present OA filed by the applicants for claiming arrears on notional promotions in Lower Selection Grade (Norm Base) cadre on 03.01.1997, Higher Selection Grade(II) cadre on 01.01.2004 and Higher 9 OA No.656/2018 Selection Grade(I) cadre on 19.01.2006. 4.2 It has been submitted that the applicant No.1 Shri D.H. Tiwari has previously filed OA No.430/2010 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench for declaring him successful in the result of Inspector of Post Cadre Exam held in June 1990 and OA was partly allowed vide order dated 02.09.2016. Further, Department has challenged CAT order dated 02.09.2016 and filed Writ Petition No.5821/2017 before the Hon'ble High Court, Bench at Nagpur. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court, Bench at Nagpur vide order dated 23.01.2018. The department has decided to implement the judgment of Hon'ble High Court, Bench at Nagpur.
Accordingly, competent authority has approved the notional promotion to the applicant to the cadre of Inspector of Post Offices w.e.f. 15.10.1990 and Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices cadre w.e.f. DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 11.05.2011 vide C.O. memo No.STA/6-10/Court Corr/DHT/2019 dated 24.01.2019 & 28.02.2019 respectively and Postal Service Group B cadre w.e.f.25.03.2015 vide Directorate memo No.9-09/2019 10 OA No.656/2018 SPG-II dated 29.03.2019, since, Inspector Posts, Assistant Superintendent of Posts and PS Group B Cadres are higher than that LSG, HSG-II & HSG-I. It is not possible to grant promotions in two different hierarchies simultaneously to Shri D.H. Tiwari. 4.3 It has been submitted that in respect of applicant No.2 (deceased employee), the matter has been referred to Postal Directorate, New Delhi on 08.04.2019 & 10.05.2019 vide letter No.STA/9-19/LSG(NB)/Postal Unit/2018 seeking clarification of arrears of pay in LSG(NB) cadre, HSG-II(NB) cadre and HSG-I(NB) cadre at par with Shri S.J. Sail and other applicants in OA Nos.225/1995, 991/1997, 718/1997, 1001/1997 and 497/2001 (Annexure IV).
4.4 It has been submitted that the applicants have challenged the order dated 19.05.2017 and the OA was filed on 24.02.2018, therefore, it was beyond one Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso year. There is delay of about more than 5 months and DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 the applicants have not even filed MA for condonation of delay. Therefore, the OA may be dismissed on this ground alone.11 OA No.656/2018
4.5 They have placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh Chandra Sharma Vs. Udham Singh Kamal reported in 199 AIR SCW 3911.
4.6 It has been submitted that promotions were given to the applicants notionally from the date shown against their names and they will not be entitled for any arrears. The LSG (NB), HSG-II(NB) and HSG-I(NB), promotion details are as under:
Name of applicant Shri D.H. Shri P.S. Joshi Tiwari Date of Birth 06.12.1957 24.02.1961 Date of entry in Dept. 17.11.1982 04.12.1979 Date of appt. in Acct. Cadre 18.04.1991 24.07.1985 Date of promotion of LSG (NB) 03.01.1997 03.01.1997 Date of promotion of HSG-II 01.01.2004 01.01.2004 Date of promotion of HSG(I) 19.01.2006 19.01.2006 Date of Retirement from Govt. 31.12.2017 03.04.2018 Service 4.7 It has been submitted that the applicants have also not preferred any appeal against the impugned orders before the respondents and, therefore, the OA is premature and needs to be dismissed on this ground. Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso
5. The applicants have filed rejoinder to the DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 reply submitted by the respondents reiterating and elaborating their submission in the OA. It has been submitted that Shri S.J. Sail, Accountant is given promotion as per CAT judgment dated 25.02.2002 passed 12 OA No.656/2018 in OA No.991/1997 and all the consequential benefits have been given to him. The arrears of pay and allowances from 03.01.1997 to till the date of retirement of Shri S.J. Sail are already paid to him.
It has been further submitted that Shri S.J. Sail is junior than applicants Nos.1 and 2 in service and Accounts cadre. Hence, it is settled law that the seniors should be given benefit at par with their juniors. They have submitted the comparative seniority of Shri S.J. Sail with the applicants in tabular form which is reproduced as under:
NAME OF D.H. TIWARI P.S. JOSHI S.J. Sail
OFFICIALS [Applicant No.1] [Applicant No.2] [Junior Official]
Date of Birth 06.12.1957 24.02.1961 01.04.1955
Date of Entry in As Postman [Direct Rectt] As Postman
Department 03.10.1977 17.10.1977
Date of Entry in 17.11.1982 04.12.1979 24.12.1982
Postal Assistant
cadre
Year of passing in 1989 1984 1991
Accountant Exam
Date of promotion of 03.01.1997 03.01.1997 03.01.1997
LSG(NB)
Date of promotion of 01.01.2004 01.01.2004 01.01.2004
Milan Jackson
Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=
0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= HSG-II(NB) Date of promotion of 19.01.2006 19.01.2006 19.01.2006 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0
HSG-I(NB)
Date of Actual 30.06.2017 23.06.2017 Not resumed but
assumption in the arrears paid vide
post of promotion Annexure A-10
Date of Retirement 31.12.2017 03.04.2018 October, 2014
13 OA No.656/2018
As per comparative gradation list referred as above, from which it is crystal clear that Shri S.J. sail is junior than both the applicants Nos.1 & 2. Hence, being a senior official, applicants Nos.1 & 2 are entitled for getting arrears of pay and allowances at par with Shri S.J. Sail. In the gradation list issued by respondent vide Annexure A-6, Shri P.S. Joshi is placed at serial No.10, Shri D.H. Tiwari is placed at serial No.33 and Shri S.J. Sail is placed at serial No.34.
So, in the gradation list (Annexure A-6) also, Shri S.J. Sail is junior to applicants Nos.1 and 2 accordingly.
5.1 It has been submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has deduced the principle of 'equal pay for equal work' from Articles 14, 16 and 39(d) and the Preamble to the Constitution. No such principles is expressly embodied in the Constitution but the principle has now Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso matured in a fundamental right. The Hon'ble Supreme DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 Court has explained in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Pramod Bhartiya (AIR 1993 SC 286 : (1993) 1 SCC 539, the doctrine of 'equal pay for equal work' is implicit in the doctrine of equality enshrined in Article 14 and flows from it. The rule is 14 OA No.656/2018 as much a part of Article 14 as it is of Article 16(1). The doctrine is also stated in Article 39(d), a directive principle, which ordains the state to direct its policy towards securing equal pay for equal work for both men and women.
5.2 It has been submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Jharkhand and Another Vs. Harihar Yadav and Others reported in 2014 (2) SCC 114 has held that Articles 142, 16, 14 and 309 - Benefit of judgment to non-
appealing respondents - on facts held, constitutional court is duty bound to ensure that all State employees concerned, irrespective of whether they have approached Court or not, get their dues in the present case.
5.3 Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of G.C. Ghosh and Others Vs. Union of India and Others reported in (1992) 19 Administrative Tribunals Cases 94 has held that benefit Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= to employees in one section of employees granted by 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 High Court judgment must be extended to other section also. Hence, decision of Allahabad High Court benefiting to other set of employee.15 OA No.656/2018
5.4 It has been submitted that as per reported judgments both the applicants are entitled to get the arrears of pay and allowances like Shri S.J. Sail and Others.
5.5 It has been further submitted that the respondents have given arrears of amount to junior official Shri S.G. Sail, who is junior to the applicants whereas the applicants, who are entitled for arrears payment, have actually worked on the said post. However, Shri S.J. Sail has not resumed against the said post nor he was working against the said post.
He was retired in October, 2014 whereas the promotion was implemented after his retirement in the year 2016. Therefore, the respondents have made misleading submissions to mislead this Tribunal.
5.6 It has been submitted that both the applicant Nos.1 & 2 have joined in promotional post on 30.06.2017 Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso and they worked upto 31.12.2017 and 03.04.2018 till DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 their retirement. Hence, they are entitled to get the arrears of pay like Shri S.J. Sail. As regards to IPO promotion of applicant No.1 is a factual position. As per order of this Tribunal, the applicant No.1 has been 16 OA No.656/2018 promoted in IPO and given all consequential benefits for fixation of pay notionally. No back wages has been paid to applicant No.1. The said order of this Tribunal has been challenged by the respondents before the Hon'ble High Court Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in which the Hon'ble High Court appreciated the decision given by this Tribunal in last para of judgment as under:
"The Tribunal rightly considered that since the respondent had not worked on the post of Inspector of post, he would not be entitled to get the back wages though he would be entitled to the consequential benefits. We find that the Tribunal has decided the original application filed by the respondent in a judicious manner and there is no scope for interference with the same.
In the result, we dismiss the writ petition with costs."
6. The respondents, in turn, have filed sur- rejoinder reiterating and elaborating the contentions made in the reply. It has been submitted that the applicant No.1 Shri D.H. Tiwari was granted notional Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson promotions in cadre of LSG(NB) w.e.f. 03.01.1997, HSG- 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 II w.e.f. 01.01.2004 and HSG-I w.e.f. 19.01.2006 vide orders dated 19.05.2017. Thereafter, in pursuance of CAT, Mumbai Bench judgment dated 02.09.2016 in OA No.430/2010, applicant No.1 was granted notional 17 OA No.656/2018 promotions in cadre of Inspector of Posts w.e.f. 15.10.1990, ASP w.e.f. 11.05.2011 and Postal Service Group B w.e.f. 25.03.2015 vide Directorate, New Delhi order dated 9-09/2019-SPG-II dated 29.03.2019. A Postal Assistant working in Department of Posts has two different and distinct channels of promotions i.e.
1. General Line:- Postal Assistant to LSG(NB), LSG(NB) to HSG II and HSG II to HSG I (by selection cum seniority basis)
2. Inspector Line:- Postal Assistant to Inspector of Posts (through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination), Inspector of Posts to Assistant Superintendent Posts and Inspector Posts/Assistant Superintendent Posts to Postal Service Group B (by selection cum seniority basis).
6.1 It has been submitted that the applicant No.1 Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso has been promoted to Inspector Posts w.e.f. 15.10.1990, DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 ASP w.e.f. 11.05.2011 and Postal Service Group B w.e.f. 25.03.2015 notionally in accordance with orders in CAT case OA No.430/2010. Thus, applicant No.1 has chosen IP line. Now, the applicant cannot choose General Line 18 OA No.656/2018 to suit his convenience and get benefit for both the channels of promotion simultaneously. Meanwhile, Directorate, New Delhi has examined the case of the applicants. Directorate vide its letter No.X-8-1/2019-
SPN-II dated 06.12.2019 has directed to calculate the notional pay of applicant No.1 in both promotional lines and then fix his pay in the line which is more beneficial to him. However, arrears of pay for the periods where applicant No.1 had not actually worked on the promotional post should not be granted. 6.2 It has been submitted that if any official was allowed promotion notionally to higher post but the official has not actually worked on that post, arrears for the promotion granted notionally shall not be allowed. Shri S.J. Sail was granted promotion of LSG (NB), HSG-II and HSG-I with all consequential benefits as per the directions of the this Tribunal in OA Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso No.991/1997. Thus, the applicant Nos.1 & 2 are not DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 eligible for arrears of pay on notional promotion. 6.3 They have also enclosed the copy of communication dated 06.12.2019 issued by Government of India, Ministry of Communications, Department of Posts 19 OA No.656/2018 to the Chief Postmaster General, Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai and copy of FR 16 and 17 which are reproduced herein as under:
"FR 16. A Government servant may be required to subscribe to a provident fund, a family pension fund or other similar fund in accordance with such rules as the President may by order prescribe.
FR 17.(1) Subject to any exceptions specifically made in these rules and to the provision of sub-rule(2), an officer shall begin to draw the pay and allowances attached to his tenure of a post with effect from the date when he assumes the duties of that post, and shall cease to draw them as soon as he ceases to discharge those duties: Provided that an officer who is absent from duty without any authority shall not be entitled to any pay and allowances during the period of such absence."
6.4 They have further placed reliance on the communication of Government of India, Ministry of Communications & IT, Department of Posts dated 22.06.2011 addressed to the Chief Postmaster General, Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai.
7. During arguments, learned counsel for both the sides have argued their case on the basis of pleadings Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= and documents filed on record.
Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0
8. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have retired on 30.04.2018 and they are claiming grant of arrears on account of notional promotion from May, 2017. She submitted that review 20 OA No.656/2018 DPC for the junior of the applicant Shri S.J. Sail was held on 07.06.2016 after his retirement in 2014. The said Shri S.J. Sail was given notional promotion and he never worked on the promoted post but still he was paid arrears of salary while the applicants have actually worked on the post but are being denied the arrears.
9. Learned counsel for the respondents Shri Rajpurohit, on the other hand, submitted that in the impugned orders, it has been specifically mentioned that the applicants are not entitled for the backwages. The applicants have accepted the said promotion order and, therefore, they cannot now claim that they should be given the backwages. He submitted that the matter was referred to the Ministry (R-4), however, the same was not agreed to. He has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in the case of Superintendent of Post DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 Office, Amravati and Others Vs. Durgaprasad Harnarayan Tiwari in Writ Petition No.5821/2017 decided on 23.01.2018 in which the similar issue was considered and it was held that 'The Tribunal rightly considered that since the respondent had not worked on 21 OA No.656/2018 the post of Inspector of Post, he would not be entitled to get the back wages though he would be entitled to the consequential benefits. We find that the Tribunal has decided the original application filed by the respondent in a judicious manner and there is no scope for interference with the same.' 9.1 He has further placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandigarh Administration and Another Vs. Jagjit Singh and Another, (1995) 1 SCC 745 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para 8 has held as under:
"8.We are of the opinion that the basis or the principle, if it can be called one, on which the writ petition has been allowed by the High Court is unsustainable in law and indefensible in principle. Since we have come across many such instances, we think it necessary to deal with such pleas at a little length. Generally speaking, the mere fact that the respondent authority has passed a particular order in the case of another person similarly situated can never be the ground for issuing a writ in favour of the petitioner on the plea of discrimination. The order in favour of the other person might be legal and valid or it might not be. That has to be investigated first before it can be directed to be followed in the case of the petitioner If the order in favour of the other person is found to be contrary to law or not warranted in the facts and circumstances of his case, it is obvious that such illegal or unwarranted order cannot be made the basis of issuing a writ compelling the respondent authority to repeat the illegality or to pass another Milan Jackson Alphanso Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document unwarranted order. The extraordinary and discretionary power of the High Court cannot be exercised for such a purpose. Merely because the Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 respondent authority has passed one illegal/unwarranted order, it does not entitle the High Court to compel the authority to repeat that illegality over again and again. The illegal/unwarranted action must be corrected, if it can be done according to law indeed, wherever it is possible, the Court should direct the appropriate authority to correct such wrong orders in accordance with law but even if it cannot be corrected, it is difficult to see how it can be made a basis for its 22 OA No.656/2018 repetition. By refusing to direct the respondent authority to repeat the illegality, the Court is not condoning the earlier illegal act/order nor can such illegal order constitute the basis for a legitimate complaint of discrimination. Giving effect to such pleas would be prejudicial to the interests of law and will do incalculable mischief to public interest. It will be a negation of law and the rule of law. Of course, if in case the order in favour of the other person is found to be a lawful and justified one it can be followed and a similar relief can be given to the petitioner if it is found that the petitioners' case is similar to the other persons' case. But then why examine another person's case in his absence rather than examining the case of the petitioner who is present before the Court and seeking the relief. Is it not more appropriate and convenient to examine the entitlement of the petitioner before the Court to the relief asked for in the facts and circumstances of his case than to enquire into the correctness of the order made or action taken in another person's case, which other person is not before the case nor is his case. In our considered opinion, such a course -- barring exceptional situations would neither be advisable nor desirable. In other words, the High Court cannot ignore the law and the well-accepted norms governing the writ jurisdiction and say that because in one case a particular order has been passed or a particular action has been taken, the same must be repeated irrespective of the fact whether such an order or action is contrary to law or otherwise. Each case must be decided on its own merits, factual and legal, in accordance with relevant legal principles. The orders and actions of the authorities cannot be equated to the judgments of the Supreme Court and High Courts nor can they be elevated to the level of the precedents, as understood in the judicial world. (What is the position in the case of orders passed by authorities in exercise of their quasi-judicial power, we express no opinion. That can be dealt with when a proper case arises.)
10. We have considered the submissions of learned Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= counsel for both the sides and perused the pleadings 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 and documents filed on record. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the issue.
11. The applicants are challenging the impugned orders dated 07.12.2017 (Annexure A-1) and 12.12.2017 23 OA No.656/2018 (Annexure A-2)and orders dated 19.05.2017 (Annexure A- 3 to Annexure A-5) whereby they were held to be not entitled for any arrears as they were given notional promotion on the ground that they have not actually worked on the said post and, therefore, they are not entitled for the arrears. However, the applicants are claiming that one Mr. S.J. Sail, who was their junior, had been paid arrears on the basis of the orders of the Tribunal even though he has not assumed the said post and not worked on the said post while the applicants have assumed the said post.
12. We find that this issue has already been examined by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench in Writ Petition No.5821/2017 in the case of Superintendent of Post Office, Amravati and Others Vs. Durgaprasad Harnarayan Tiwari- (Applicant No.1 in the present OA). The Hon'ble High Court vide its judgement and Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 order dated 23.01.2018 was pleased to hold that 'The d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 Tribunal rightly considered that since the respondent had not worked on the post of Inspector of Post, he would not be entitled to get the back wages though he would be entitled to the consequential benefits. We find that the Tribunal has decided the Original Application filed by the respondent in a judicious manner 24 OA No.656/2018 and there is no scope for interference with the same.' Since the above issue has already been decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, we do not find any merit in the claim of the applicants that merely because the some other person was granted the arrears, the applicants also become for the same even though the rules do not permit.
13. We further find that FR 17(1)reads as under :
FR 17.(1) Subject to any exceptions specifically made in these rules and to the provision of sub-rule(2), an officer shall begin to draw the pay and allowances attached to his tenure of a post with effect from the date when he assumes the duties of that post, and shall cease to draw them as soon as he ceases to discharge those duties:
Provided that an officer who is absent from duty without any authority shall not be entitled to any pay and allowances during the period of such absence."
14. We further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandigarh Administration and Another Vs. Jagjit Singh and Another (supra) has held that 'The mere fact that the respondent authority has passed a particular order in Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65= Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= the case of another person similarly situated can never 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0 be the ground for issuing a writ in favour of the petitioner on the plea of discrimination. The order in favour of the other person might be legal and valid or it might not be'. It is a settled law that if a person 25 OA No.656/2018 has not worked on a post, he will not be entitled for arrears as he has been given promotion on notional basis even though he will be entitled for seniority and promotion. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this Original Application. The same is liable to be dismissed and is, accordingly, dismissed. Pending MAs, if any, stand closed. No costs.
(Umesh Gajankush) (Shri Krishna)
Member (J) Member (A)
ma.
Digitally signed by Milan Jackson Alphanso
DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=
Milan Jackson 0815a10efc18484c96f92d4cf96b158b, Phone= 30f7d919c844ed7f75e7bc56633df96108338768adae5582338f0d13 d4f0f1dc, PostalCode=401203, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 6b7c9269fe100118bd94c76380691e4802b189a40578bdd0fd757c8 b8babf6f4, CN=Milan Jackson Alphanso Alphanso Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.02.02 12:13:48+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2024.4.0