Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

::16 :: OA No. 105/2025 & allied matters The department had given assurance to all these RTPs for regularization against future vacancies.

4.2 While the applicants were rendering their service as per the RTP scheme, the various Unions have taken up their case for early regularization with the respondent department. With the intervention of the court, the department abandoned the RTP scheme and stopped the new/fresh recruitment of Sorting Assistant/Posting Assistant as RTP. Meanwhile, the Central Government imposed a ban on the recruitment and this was continued for a long period of time. As a result, during this period, no RTP employee engaged earlier got a permanent posting as assured by the respondent department.

However, the applicants who were appointed under RTP scheme were not allowed for benefit of TBOP/BCR scheme. The period spent under training and length of service as RTP of the applicant was not counted for granting promotion under TBOP/BCR scheme though they were performing the same duty which was carried out by previously employed officials.

4.4 Since, the employees working under the RTP scheme have not been granted the benefit of financial upgradation and regularization, being aggrieved the All India Postal Employee‟s Union had filed an OA, ::17 :: OA No. 105/2025 & allied matters which was decided by the Jabalpur Bench of this Tribunal vide judgment dated 16th December, 1986 (i.e., TA No. 82/1986, All India Postal Employees Union Vs Union of India through Secretary, Postal Department & Ors.), in the said order the Jabalpur Bench while deprecating the stoppage of further recruitment and absorption for the cadre of post of Postal Assistants, had issued various directions to review such policy as also directed the respondents to absorb the RTP employee against regular post in phase manner in terms of circular dated 30.10.1980 as if no restriction has been imposed on their regular recruitment/absorption earlier, if necessary by creating supernumerary posts, and subject to screening of the unfit by specially constituted Screening Committee to examine their record and performance as also by keeping in view the seniority of the said RTP employees.

8.4 It is submitted that, claim of the applicants with regard to the seniority is concerned, as per the relevant Rules, as also, as established by catena of decision, length of service shall be counted from the date of regular entry in the respective cadre. Undisputedly, seniority of the applicants had been fixed accordingly based on their regular entry in the services. It is submitted that, seniority list so prepared is neither produced nor challenged by the applicants and hence, their seniority has achieved finality. It is submitted that, after more than 40 years, applicants cannot asked for the seniority counting their alleged service rendered as RTP, especially, during the period of RTP, they were not in the regular cadre and even otherwise, as per the enunciation by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, issue of seniority if finalized long back, cannot be claimed to be changed subsequently and that too, after retirement. And also, the applicants have not joined any likely to be affected employee i.r.t. fixation of seniority. Pertinently, except document directing the applicants to go for 2.5 months theoretical and 15 days practical training, as also, regular appointment order no other RTP service related documents have been produced by the applicants showing their exact date of entry as RTP; when they were called for work and for how many days; when they were placed in List-A from List-B etc., meaning thereby, no other contemporaneous substantial and cogent documents /service record of the time of RTP tenure has been produced by the applicants. As such, claim of the applicants regarding seniority, is based on no document, and hence, is untenable and misconceived.

8.11 Learned counsel for the respondents also relied upon the judgment passed by High Court of Patna in the case of Bipin Bihari Dutta V/s Union of India decided on 28.02.2012 wherein by relying upon the decision rendered by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of K.N.Sivadas(supra) High Court rejected the claim for reckoning their RTP period as qualifying service.

Further, on 24/01/2023 Hon‟ble Madras High Court in WP Nos.13633/2020 and allied matters had ruled that service rendered as RTP cannot be reckoned for the purpose of seniority, financial up gradation under TBOP, MACP etc. On 22/03/202 CAT, Earnakulam Bench in O.A.No.482/2018 and other 12 matters had declined the relief of regularization of RTP service and such relief had been declined not only on merits, but, on the ground of delay also. On 30/04/2024 CAT, Cuttack Bench in O.A.No.316/2020 had rendered a ::34 :: OA No. 105/2025 & allied matters decision rejecting the claim of the applicants on merits, as well as, on the count of delay, for regularization of RTP service for the purpose of annual increment, TBOP, MACP. On 04/112024 Hon‟ble High Court of Madras had rendered a decision in WP No.1373/2021 and another matter had dismissed the petition filed by RTP employees seeking regularization of RTP service for the purpose of fixation of seniority, pay and other allowances. It is stated that on 27/02/2025 Hon‟ble CAT, Hyderabad Bench had rendered decision in O.A.No.27/2018 and many other allied matters and dismissed the claim of the RTP employees.