Karnataka High Court
Mohammed Rafeeq vs Union Of India on 5 August, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30985-DB
WP No. 8266 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
WRIT PETITION NO. 8266 OF 2024 (S-CAT)
BETWEEN:
MOHAMMED RAFEEQ,
S/O IBRAHIM SAB,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
WORKING AS GDS MD,
BENGALURU CITY, MDG,
BENGALURU 560 002,
RESIDING AT NO. 36/6,
3RD CROSS, BYRASANDRA,
JAYANAGAR 1ST BLOCK,
BENGALURU - 560 011.
Digitally
signed by K G ...PETITIONER
RENUKAMBA
Location:
High Court of (BY SRI. RADHAKRISHNA HOLLA. A., ADVOCATE)
Karnataka
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA,
BY SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF POSTS,
DAK BHAVAN,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
2. THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL,
KARNATAKA CIRCLE,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30985-DB
WP No. 8266 of 2024
3. THE POSTMASTER GENERAL,
SOUTH KARNATAKA REGION,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
4. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
OF POST OFFICES,
BENGALURU WEST DIVISION,
BENGALURU - 560 086.
5. THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT
OF POST OFFICES,
KOLAR DIVISION,
KOLAR - 563 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ANUPAMA HEGDE, CGC)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 06.11.2023 PASSED BY THE CAT IN
OA/170/00086/2021 ANNEXURE-A, ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO
and
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL ORDER
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO) The challenge in this petition is to the order dated 06.11.2023 in OA No.170/00086/2021 passed by the -3- NC: 2024:KHC:30985-DB WP No. 8266 of 2024 Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench, Bengaluru ('Tribunal' for short), whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the original application filed by the petitioner herein by stating in paragraph No.14 as under:
"14. Keeping this in view, the OA filed by the applicant seeking appointment to MTS cadre based on his past service as Group D in APS or by taking his seniority on account of the service rendered by him in Kolar Division, cannot be countenanced."
2. The grievance of the petitioner is, while working as GDS, he was sent on deputation to Army Postal Service (APS) in the year 1997. The petitioner sought repatriation to the respondents for personal reasons. On his repatriation from APS, he was posted as GDS at Kolar Division on 17.10.2004. He continued to work in Kolar Division as GDS till 2016 when he sought his posting in Bengaluru Division on his own request. The result and the effect thereof is, the petitioner was placed at the bottom of seniority list in the Bengaluru Division. -4-
NC: 2024:KHC:30985-DB WP No. 8266 of 2024
3. The submission of Sri. Radhakrishna Holla.A, learned counsel for the petitioner is, when the petitioner was repatriated to the respondents as GDS, the respondents should have given Group-D post or an option to the petitioner to seek voluntary retirement. Unfortunately, the same has not been done by the respondents, which resulted in him not getting promotion to the post of Group-D till date.
4. On the other hand, learned CGC for respondents would submit, though on repatriation to the respondents from APS, his seniority has not been affected, but none of the juniors to the petitioner have been promoted to Group-D. According to her, as per the seniority position, the petitioner's name is at Sl.No.551 as against which, it is only the person at Sl.No.369 who has got promotion to Group-D/MTS, that too in the year 2023. In that sense, there cannot be any grievance for the petitioner to seek promotion to the post of Group-D. -5- NC: 2024:KHC:30985-DB WP No. 8266 of 2024
5. In view of the submission made by the learned CGC for the respondents and also the fact that the submission of Sri. Holla that petitioner should have posted in Group-D post on his repatriation, does not appeal us for the simple reason that any grievance of the petitioner of not being posted in Group-D was in the year 2004 whereas, OA was filed in the year 2021. In other words, it is quite late in the day for the petitioner to agitate the said grievance. That apart, no junior to the petitioner has been promoted to Group-D. Hence, he cannot have any grievance for not been promoted to Group-D as well.
We do not see any merit in the petition, the same is dismissed.
Sd/-
(V KAMESWAR RAO) JUDGE Sd/-
(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PA CT:CN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26