Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras
M Balasundaram vs M/O Defence on 24 October, 2024
1 MA 310/00850/2024 &
OA 310/01536/2024
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH
MA 310/00850/2024 & OA/310/01536/2024
Dated Thursday, the 24th day of October, Two Thousand and Twenty Four
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. M. SWAMINATHAN, Member (J)
1. M.Balasundaram, PPO No.40920141941101f
S/oK.Muthu
2. G.Nehru, PPO No.809202200428
S/oN.Govindarajan
3. P. Ammasi, PPO No. 409201000524
S/o Parattiyan
4. V. Sekar, PPO No. 409201500442
S/o D. Vadivelachari
5. K. Gandhivelayutham, PPO No. 409201100509
S/o Kurusamy pillai
6. P.Mahendran, PPONo.809200700401
S/oI.Perumal
7. M.Natarajan, PPO No.40920051942201x
S/o Murugesan
8. S. Jayapaul Raj, PPO No. 4092000900574
S/o. Sundaram
9. P. Kothandaraman, PPO No. 409202100128
S/o. K. Perumal
10. P.Chinnuswamy, PPONo.C/Misc/17323/2010
S/oPongali
11. K. Muthumanickam. PPO No. 409201800018
S/o L. Krishnamurthy
2 MA 310/00850/2024 &
OA 310/01536/2024
12. V.Elumalai,PPONo.809202000809
S/o P.V. Vellai Pillai
13.V. Yethendra Babu, PPO No. 409201000637
S/o V. Krishnaiah
14.S. Annadurai, PPO No. C/MISC/16669/2013
S/o Subramani
15.A. Carl Marx, PPO No. 409202000343
S/o Arivukarasu
16.V. Krishnan, PPO No. 409201700872
S/o Varadha chettiyar
17.P. Palanichamy, PPO No. 409201100607
S/o Pandhan
18. P. Murugesan, PPO No. 409201300550
S/o Palayam
19. K. Kannan, PPO No. 409201400626
S/o M K Kalyanasundhram .... Applicants
By Advocate M/s. Anita A. Swain
Vs
1. The Union Of India, Rep. by Secretary, Ministry of Defence, 101-A, South
Block, New Delhi-110 011.
2. Dept. of Personnel & Training (DoP&T) Rep by Its Secretary, North Block,
Central Secretariat, New Delhi - 110 001.
3. Dept. of Expenditure, Rep by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, North
Block, New Delhi-110 001.
4. Defence Research & Development Organization (D.R.D.O.), Represented
by its Chairman, Ministry of Defence, DRDO Bhavan, Rajaji Marg, New Del-
hi - 110 011.
3 MA 310/00850/2024 &
OA 310/01536/2024
5. Combat Vehicle Research & Development Establishment (C.V.R.D.E.),
Represented by its Director, Avadi, Chennai - 600 054. ... Respon-
dents
By Advocate Mr. K. Rajendran, SCGSC
4 MA 310/00850/2024 &
OA 310/01536/2024
ORAL ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. Swaminathan, Member(J)) For the reasons stated in the MA and in the interest of justice, MA 310/00850/2024 filed by the applicants for joining together and filing single OA is allowed.
2. In the instant OA, the applicants seeks the following relief:
"a.....to direct the Respondent to grant one annual increment as earned by the applicants on the last day of their service, for the service rendered by them for the preceding one year.
b. That in consequence of compliance of prayer clause (a) the PPO of the applicant to be revised and the applicant be declared entitled to all consequential benefits thereof.
c) Such other reliefs to which the Applicant is found enti-
tled to may be granted.
e) Saddle the cost of this application on the Respondents."
2. Brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicants:
The Applicants are pensioners and worked under the 5th respondent and superannuated from the Department on 30 th June /31st December from the year 2007 to 2022. While calculating the retirement benefit, they were not given one increment for the completed period of year viz 30th June / 31st December. The applicants, after coming to know about various decisions of this Tribunal and the latest decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Director (Admn.HR) 5 MA 310/00850/2024 & OA 310/01536/2024 KPTCL & Others Vs C.P. Mundinamani & Others (2023) SCC Online SC 401, various High Courts, including the Hon'ble Madras High Court and various CAT orders, that, for the completed period of one year, the employees who retired on the 30th June or the 31st December, as the case may be, are entitled to one increment, even though they are not in service on 1 st July or 1st January. The applicants had given representations seeking notional increment.
Though the above representations were received by the respondents, there is no reply till date. Hence, the applicants have filed the present OA.
3. Heard learned counsels M/s. Anita A. Swain for the applicants, and Mr. K. Rajendran, SCGSC who takes notice for the respondents.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently objected the OA on the ground of delay and submitted that the applicants retired way back from 2007 to 2022, cannot claim the increment, as they have been a fence-sitter. More- over, the applicants have not given convincing reasons for the delay in filing the OA immediately after their retirement or raising such an issue before the authorities. He relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in OA No.460 of 2023, dated 16.06.2023, on identical issue. Therefore, he pleaded for the dis- missal of the OA.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the decision of this Tribunal in OA No.460 of 2023 was overruled by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in WP.No.28435 of 2023, vide the order, dated 03.11.2023. He further 6 MA 310/00850/2024 & OA 310/01536/2024 submitted that this Tribunal, in its recent decisions, dated 08.02.2023, in OA Nos.57 of 202, 275 of 2020, 294 of 2020, 383 of 2021, 384 of 2021, 379 of 2021, 40 of 2021, 656 of 2022 and 751 of 2022, has extended the benefit of one increment for the completed period of one year of service, for similarly placed persons. He further submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court has decided the issue in favour of similarly placed persons in Civil Appeal No.2471 of 2023 (SLP (C ) No.6185 of 2020, vide its order, dated 11.04.2023. Therefore, he pleaded for grant of the relief sought in the OA.
7. Be that as it may, to meet the ends of justice, it would be appropriate to direct the competent authority among the respondents to consider the individual representations (Annexure A7) of the applicants, and dispose of the same by passing a well-reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that this Tribunal is not entering into the merits of the issue and the limitation point is kept open.
8. With the above direction, the OA is disposed of, at the admission stage.
(M. Swaminathan) Member (J) 24.10.2024 AS