Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
S Sumathi vs M/O Communications on 6 October, 2023
1 OA 310/00425/2020
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH
OA 310/00425/2020
Dated Friday the 6th day of October Two Thousand Twenty Three
CORAM :
HON'BLE MS. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE, Member (J)
&
HON'BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, Member (A)
S.Sumathi
Daughter of S.Sivagnanamoorthi,
No.119, Periyar Nagar,
T.V.Koil,
Tiruchirappalli 620 005.
(Retired Postal Assistant). ... Applicant
By Advocate M/s R. Malaichamy
Vs
1. Union of India,
Rep. By the Secretary,
Ministry of Communications,
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi - 110 001.
2. The Chief Postmaster General,
Tamil Nadu Circle,
Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.
3. The Postmaster General
Central Region (YN)
Tiruchirappali 62 001.
4. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,
Tiruchirappali Division,
Tiruchirappalli - 620 001. ... Respondents
By Advocate Mr. J. Vasu
2 OA 310/00425/2020
ORAL ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Ms. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Member(J)) Heard both sides.
2. By this Original Application, the applicant is seeking the following reliefs:
"i. To call for the records of the 4th respondent pertaining to the order made in No. B2/RTP dlgs dated 21.09.2020 and set aside the same, consequent to direct the respondents to treat the RTP service of the applicant from 12.10.1983 for the purpose to advance the TBOP, BCR, etc., in accordance with the Directorate instructions contained in letter dated 21.02.2018 and direct the respondents to extend the benefits of judgments made in O.A. No. 79 of 2011 and batch cases of the Ernakulam Bench of this Tribunal dated 01.10.2013 and the judgments of this Tribunal made in OA 310/01149/2014, OA 310/01240/2014 dated 27.06.2019 and OA 310/00032/2016 dated 30.08.2019; consequent to ii. direct the respondents to revise and re-fix the pay of the applicant and also to pay arrears of salary and pension and other monetary benefits to her; and iii. To pass such further or other orders as this Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
3. The brief facts of the case, in a nutshell, are as under:
The applicant entered into the respondents Postal Department as Sort Duty Assistant called RTP on 12.10.1983 and she was regularised in the year 1988 and worked continuously as such and while working as 3 OA 310/00425/2020 Postal Assistant retired from service on 31.03.2018. Due to ban on creation and filling of vacant posts, she was regularly appointed in the year 1988. Hence her service rendered from 1983 till she was regularised should be taken into account for grant of TBOP and BCR. Similarly placed persons filed before Ernakulam Bech of this Tribunal in OA 79/2011 and batch cases seeking directions to count the period spent on RTP PA/SA services for the purpose of grant of TBOP, BCR etc and vide its order dated 01.10.2013 this Tribunal disposed of the OA which was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam in OA(CAT) No. 89 of 2014 (Z) and Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Diary No. (s) 25442/2017. Based on the above judgment, this Tribunal has also allowed similar nature of cases in OAs 1149/2014, 1240/2014, 1734/2018 and 32/2016. Based on the above judgment the applicant made a request to the respondent authority on 27.02.2020 to extend the benefit of the above judgments to her also which was not acceded to by the respondents.
Hence this OA.
4. After notice the respondents have entered appearance through their counsel and filed a detailed reply statement on the ground that the applicant was selected as a candidate under RTP Scheme during 1983 and the period of service till the date of absorption to the regular post was purely adhoc in nature. Consequent upon the absorption of the applicant to regular post, she was covered under CCS Pension Rules which clearly 4 OA 310/00425/2020 provide that qualifying service of a Government Servant shall commence from the date of appointment to regular posts. The MACP scheme clearly provides for financial upgradation based on "regular service" from the date of joining of a post in direct entry grade on regular basis either through direct recruitment or on absorption / re-employment basis and categorically rules out service rendered on ad-hoc / contract basis before appointment.
5. It is further submitted that against the orders of this Tribunal in OAs 1149/2014, 1240/2014 and 32/2016 with a direction to consider the case of the applicant on the basis of the CAT, Ernakulam Bench order in OA 79/2011 and batch cases and the order passed by the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in OP (CAT) 89/14 in K.S. Beena Vs. UOI and others, the respondent department have filed WP 13633/2020, 188/2021 and 1373/2021 before the Hon'ble High Madras and interim stay has been granted. Hence the respondents pray for the dismissal of the OA.
6. Heard both sides. Perused the OA and other connected records.
7. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the applicant fairly submitted that the Writ Petition filed by the respondents in the similar issues has been decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras and the Writ Petitions filed by the Department has been allowed and order of this Tribunal has been quashed and set aside.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that they have 5 OA 310/00425/2020 already filed Review Application in the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras which is in Diary Number stage.
9. In view of the submissions made by the parties, the respondents are directed to extend the benefit to the applicant subject to the outcome of the review application filed in similar matters.
10. With the above directions, OA is disposed of. No order as to costs.
(Lata Baswaraj Patne) Member (J) 06.10.2023 AS