Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam
K T Gangadharan vs The Superintendent Of Post Offices ... on 1 April, 2022
1
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM BENCH
Original Application No. 180/00536/2021
Friday, this the 1st day of April, 2022
CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. P. Madhavan, Judicial Member
Hon'ble Mr. K.V. Eapen, Administrative Member
K.T. Gangadharan, aged 58, S/o. Narayanan Nambiar P. M.,
Postal Assistant, Kasaragod HPO - 671 121,
Residing at Kozhummal P.O., Karivellur Via, Kannur - 670 522.
.....Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. Vishnu S. Chempazhanthiyil)
Versus
1. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Kasaragode Division, Kasaragode - 671 121.
2. The Chief Postmaster General,
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 033.
3. Union of India, represented by the
Director General & Secretary, Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 116. ..... Respondents
(By Advocate : Mr. C. Rajendran, SCGC)
This application having been heard on 22.03.2022, the Tribunal on
01.04.2022 delivered the following:
ORDER
Hon'ble Mr. P. Madhavan, Judicial Member -
This is an O.A filed seeking the following reliefs:
"(i) Direct the respondents to extend the benefits of counting of Army Postal Services Service for financial upgradation under MACP as granted in Annexure A3, A5, A6 and A7 judgments, to the applicant.
(ii) Declare that the applicant is eligible and entitled to be extended with the same benefits as granted to similarly situated colleagues as in Annexure A7 judgment, which was implemented in Annexure A8 and direct the respondents to 2 extend the same benefits to the applicant also.
(iii) Any other further relief or order as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice;
(iv) Award the cost of these proceedings to the applicant."
2. The brief facts of the case is that the applicant joined the Postal Department as Reserve Trained Pool Postal Assistant in Kasaragode Division. While he was working as Reserve Trained Pool Postal Assistant in Kasaragod devision, he was selected as a Warrant Officer, APS Corps. The said order is produced at Annexure A1. While he was working as Warrant Officer in the Army, the applicant was appointed as a Postal Assistant on a regular basis on 28.05.1990 as per Annexure A2 Order. The applicant was discharged from the Army and he continued as Postal Assistant in the Postal Department. According to him, he was working a regular employee in the Army Postal Service. The applicant was also granted all the admissible service benefits as a regular Warrant Officer of the Army. In this case, the respondents were not counting the regular service under Army Postal Service for granting of Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP). An O.A No. 708 of 2008 was filed before the Tribunal by similarly situated RTP Postal Assistants, who were appointed as Postal Assistants after service in the APS, and it was allowed by the Tribunal on 08.10.2009. It was declared that the service rendered in the Army Postal Service can be counted for the purpose of placement under TBOP. He has produced a copy of the said order in O.A 708 of 2008 as Annexure A3. The applicant was also later granted the benefit by counting the APS service for granting TBOP. Now the question is whether the service in the APS will be counted for granting of MACP. The 3 respondents did not count the regular service rendered in the APS for calculating 20 years of service for grant of 2nd MACP. According to the applicant, similarly situated persons had approached the Tribunal for considering the APS service also for grant of benefit of MACP in O.A No. 856/2012. The same was allowed by the Tribunal and it was held that the services rendered as full time Warrant Officer in Army Postal Service has to be counted as regular service in direct entry grade for benefits under MACP. A copy of the order is produced as Annexure A5.
3. Another O.A 724/2015 was filed by similarly situated colleagues of the applicant and it was also allowed by the Tribunal. The benefit of counting APS Service for grant of ACP was also granted when the similarly situated persons approached the Tribunal. The applicant alone is now denied the benefit of MACP in this case. Even though the applicant has given a representation as Annexure A9, the same was not considered, so he seeks the above relief.
4. The respondents in this case had filed a detailed statement admitting the service details stated by the applicant. According to them, the applicant was appointed as PA in Ramanthali w.e.f 29.05.1984 and he was deputed to APS as per order of appointment produced as Annexure A1. The applicant would get the benefit of regular appointment only with effect from the date of his immediate junior in the RTP list was appointed on a regular basis. Accordingly, in the year 1990, the applicant got regular appointment. The applicant was granted the benefit of counting of APS service for conferment 4 of TBOP on completion of 16 years of service. The Government has introduced MACP scheme as per Office Memorandum dated 18.09.2009. According to the respondents the employees who had completed regular service of 10/20/30 years reckoned from their date of entry in the initial grade are eligible for placement in the immediate next higher grade pay in the hierarchy of revised pay bands. The regular service of the applicant can only commence from the date of joining in the post of direct entry grade on a regular basis. The service rendered on ad-hoc/contract basis before regular appointment shall not be reckoned for the purpose of financial upgradation. So the respondents had granted MACP only from the date of his regular appointment, i.e., 28.05.1990 and the service in the APS was not counted as it was an ad-hoc appointment. According to the respondents, the applicant is not similarly situated as other applicants who had filed O.A which are produced at Annexure A5, Annexure A6 and Annexure A7. It is admitted that Annexure A7 judgment was implemented by the Department in personam and such implementation cannot be treated as a precedence in any other cases.
5. We have heard counsel appearing for the applicant as well as counsel appearing on the side of the respondents, we have also carefully perused the decisions of this Tribunal in O.A Nos. 856/2012, 79/2013 and 724/2015. On a perusal of these judgments, it can be seen that in all the above O.As including Annexure A7, the Tribunal found that the service rendered in the Army Postal Service has to be counted as regular service in the direct entry grade while computing the service of persons for reckoning benefits under 5 MACP. As per Annexure A7 similarly situated persons were granted the benefit of reckoning Army Postal Service as regular service in the entry grade. So there is no reason to deny the same benefit to the applicant herein who was in the Army Postal Service till he was appointed as Regular Postal Assistant. So, it is clear that the applicant is similarly situated as applicants in Annexure A7 judgment and is also entitled to get the benefit. Accordingly, we hereby allow the O.A. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant and consider his APS Service for the purpose of granting 2nd MACP and pass orders. This exercise should be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. The O.A is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
(K.V. EAPEN) (P. MADHAVAN)
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
bp
6
Annexures
Annexure A1- True copy of communication No. B1/APS dated 26.05.1984 issued by the 1st respondent.
Annexure A2- True copy of communication No. B1/Rectt/Dlgs dated 30.05.1990 issued by the 1st respondent.
Annexure A3- True copy of the Order in O.A No. 708 of 2008 of this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure A4- True copy of the Memo No. B1/1 Promotion/Dlg dated 02.09.2010 issued by the 1st Respondent.
Annexure A5- True copy of the order in O.A No. 856/2012 of the Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure A6- True copy of order in O.A No. 79/2013 of this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure A7- True copy of the order dated 31.03.2016 in O.A No. 724/2015 of the Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure A8- True copy of the communication No. B1/MACP/Dlg/2015-16 dated 12.07.2017 issued by the 1st respondent.
Annexure A9- True copy of the representation dated 04.08.2021 to the 1st respondent.
*****