Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

SHAFFIQUE,J The writ petition is filed by the respondents in O.A.No.724/2010 of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) challenging the order dated 21/02/2012. Respondent herein is the applicant in the O.A.

2. Facts of the case disclose that the applicant, while working as GDSMD at Kokkottukonam requested for a transfer on medical grounds. According to him, the regular Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Post Master (GDS BPM) at Kokkottukonam GDS BO died on 17/03/2009 and the said post became vacant. The petitioner submitted a representation for transfer to the said post as the applicant was not in a position to discharge the duties of GDSMC. The applicant was diagonised with cardiac complaint and started getting treatment at Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. In the meantime, the 2nd respondent's office called the applicant and orally enquired whether he is willing to work on the lower TRCA in the post of BPM. The applicant had given his consent in writing. Thereafter, he was advised a by pass surgery for his cardiac problems and he was awaiting his turn at the Government Hospital. It is, at this point of time that Annexure A1 notice is issued by the department requesting the applicant to submit an application for appointment to the post of GDS BPM at Kokkottukonam GDS BO on a TRCA of Rs.2745 - 50 -4245.

4. Before the Tribunal, petitioners contended that there is no provision for transfer except on the strength of order dated 17/07/2006 produced as Annexure R1 and in so far as transfer is to a post on lower TRCA since Courts have held that TRCA drawn has to be protected, a decision was taken by the respondents to give transfer to the GDS only to posts having the same TRCA drawn by them at the time of transfer. Request of the applicant was thus rejected and the decision of the Chief Post Master General was communicated to the IP of Attingal Sub Division.

8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the argument of the petitioner is not at all sustainable since even as per Annexure R1 transfer is possible on medical grounds and what is requested for is a transfer to a lower post in the same office and the petitioner had agreed to work at lower TRCA. Learned counsel for the respondent also brought to our notice that the contention urged by the petitioner has no basis in so far as a Full Bench of the Tribunal had held in O.A.No.349/2007 that in respect of transfer from one post to another within the same recruitment unit but with different TRCA (that is higher to lower) pay protection on the same lines as in respect of transfer from one post to the same post with different TRCA within the same recruitment unit would be available. A Division Bench of this Court at Ext.P7 upheld the judgment of the Full Bench of the Tribunal and it is held as follows:

"11. The only benefit given in the impugned judgment of the Full Bench of the Tribunal is that when a GDS enjoying a higher TRCA moves to a different office where the applicable TRCA would be of a lower level, the pay is protected. It is not the pay scale that is protected. The manner in which the Full Bench has moulded the relief is only to ensure that GDSs who, at that time, were drawing TRCA at the range noted in the immediately preceding paragraph are not deprived of the benefit in terms of the pay that they were drawing in a particular TRCA while they are transferred to other offices in the same recruiting unit."