Manish Ranjan vs M/O Personnel,Public Grievances And ... on 3 September, 2021
10. He also mentions that the similar order has been
passed by the Ernakulam Bench of CAT in OA
No.45/2008 which was upheld by the Hon‟ble High
Court of Kerala. He also mentions that the order of WP
No.14097-14100/2005 in the case of Dr. Rajendra
Kumar vs. National Capital Territory of Delhi, which
have been referred to in the order of the Calcutta
Bench has also been upheld by the Supreme Court in
CA No.1753/2007. Therefore, learned counsel
submitted that the order communicated by the
Principal Bench dated 20.12.2011 saying that for grant
of non-functional grade, the period of four years of
approved service should be counted from the date of
absorption and not from the date of deputation is not
sustainable and should be quashed. The benefit
already being provided to the applicant reckoning his
approved regular service from 03.04.2000 should not
be unsettled in view of the order of DoPT which is
11 OA 545 of 2019
unsustainable. Learned counsel for applicant
submitted that he is not pressing for other reliefs
sought in the application, i.e. to allow the service
rendered in equivalent grade on deputation basis in
other Department prior to joining CAT towards
eligibility criteria of four years‟ approved regular
service.