Hon. CAT, Ernakulam Bench (Kerala Circle) in OA No. 180/00020/2015 dated 15.02.2016, allowed the O.A as no other third party interest is put in jeopardy and as the applicants will not be eligible for other benefits like pay for the aforesaid period. Hence it is declared that the applicants are deemed to have been appointed from the date the vacancy arose and that they shall be included in the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972. Respondents are directed to collect necessary subscription under the Provident Fund Rules and the contributions collected from the applicants under the new pension scheme shall be credited to their general provident fund account. It is made clear that no other financial benefits including increments and backwages have been granted to the applicants for the aforesaid period.
In this connection RTI has been made
for seeking status of the case. The reply received from the Regional office is
attached herewith for information.
Information Shard by
Shri. Dhavan Sangani,
OADO, Rajkot DIvision, Rajkot - 360 001
==============================================================
O.A.No. 180/00020/2015
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH, ERNAKULAM
ERNAKULAM BENCH, ERNAKULAM
O.A.No. 180/00020/2015
Monday this the 15th day of
February, 2016
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. U. SARATHCHANDRAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
1. Sheeba B., Aged 32 years,
W/o Praveen K,
Postal Assistant, Karivallur P.O. 670 521
Residing at ‘Parvathi’, Karivellur,
Kannur District
W/o Praveen K,
Postal Assistant, Karivallur P.O. 670 521
Residing at ‘Parvathi’, Karivellur,
Kannur District
2. Shinoy P. Aged 34 years,
S/o MukundanN.P.,
Postal Assistant,
Thalassery Head Post Ofice 670 691
Residing at Neelamparambil House,
Vellayil, Pathayakkunnu,
Thalassery, Kannur District. …. Applicant
S/o MukundanN.P.,
Postal Assistant,
Thalassery Head Post Ofice 670 691
Residing at Neelamparambil House,
Vellayil, Pathayakkunnu,
Thalassery, Kannur District. …. Applicant
(Applicant Mr. U. Balagangadharan, Advocate)
vs.
1. Union of India, represented by
the Secretary to the Government,
Ministry of Communication,
Department of Posts,
New Delhi 110 011.
the Secretary to the Government,
Ministry of Communication,
Department of Posts,
New Delhi 110 011.
2. The Chief Postmaster General,
Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram – 695033.
Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram – 695033.
3. The Superintendent of Post Office,
Department of Posts,
Kannur 670 001,
Kannur District. . . . . Respondents
Department of Posts,
Kannur 670 001,
Kannur District. . . . . Respondents
(Respondents by Mr. N. Anil Kumar, Sr.PCGC)
This Application having been finally heard and reserved for
orders on 27.01.2016, the Tribunal on 15.02.2016 delivered the following:
ORDER
ORDER
Applicants are directly recruited
Postal Assistants, appointed in the year 2005 against the vacancies arose
in the year 2002. They are aggrieved by not including them in the
statutory pension scheme under the CCS (Pension) Scheme by notionally
pre-dating their appointment from the date of occurrence of a vacancy.
According to them, the delay occurred in finalising the recruitment
process for the said posts was due to the fault of the respondents though
the vacancies had arisen in the year 2002. Hence they pray for the relief
as under:
‘8.i) Call for records leading to
Annexure A6 and A7 and set aside the same as legally and factually
unsustainable.
b” Direct the 3rd respondent to
induct the applicants into statutory pension scheme under CCS pension
Rules notionally treating them to have been appointed as Postal Assistants
from the date of occurrence of vacancies in the year 2002 for the
limited purpose of grant of pension under CCS (Pension) Rules only.
Iii) Direct the respondent Nos. 3
& 4 to stop all recoveries from the pay and allowances of the
applicants towards New Pension Scheme and refund the entire amounts so
far recovered from the applicants with immediate effect.
. Declare that applicants are deemed to have been appointed
as Postal Assistant notionally and they are regulated by CCS pension
Rules.
. Grant such other relief that the Court may feel fit in the
facts and circumstances of the case.’
2. Respondents in their reply
statement contend that the posts of Postal Assistants were notified vide
Annexure R.3(a) (collectively) in March 2004, by publishing in news papers
by fixing the last date for receiving application as 31.3.2004. The
Applicants respondened to the aforesaid notificatiion and took part in the
recruitment process. They were selected to the cadre of Postal Assistants
and were appointed in the Vadakara Division with effect from 15.2.2005. As
the new pension scheme came into force with effect from 1.1.2004, the
applicants are to be considered only under the new pension scheme and they
are not eligible for to be included in the statutory pension scheme under
the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972. It is further submitted by the respondents
that the O.A. is barred by limitation because the cause of action has
arisen way back in 2005. It is further contended by the respondents
that as the applicants took part in the recruitment process as outsiders
their claim for inclusion in the statutory pension existed prior to their
selection and appointment in the department is not
permissible.Respondents pray for rejecting the O.A.
3. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides. Perused
record.
4. Applicants place reliance on
Annexure A/8 order dated 28.06.2013 of this Tribunal in O.A. No.724/2012.
According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the case of the
applicant in Annexure A/8 case is akin to the case of the applicants in
the O.A. on hand. The learned counsel relied on paras 7 and 9 of Annexure
A/8 order. The aforesaid paragraphs are extracted below:
‘7. Admittedly the vacancies belong
to 2002. Invariably examinations for promotion to Postman or Postal
Assistants etc. Take place in the very same year and appointment made
immediately. This is with a view to avoid any problems relating to
seniority etc. Especially when there is more than one source of
recruitment. The applicants belong to GDS quota while some other quotas
are also available for promotion to the post of Postman (as for
example promotion from group -D). In the instant case there has been a
delay of two years in conducting the examination though the respondents
have stated that the applicants on their own volition had taken up the
examination n 2004, since that was the only examination conducted after
the vacancies of 2002 have arisen they cannot be blamed for taking up the
examination only in 2004. Had there been an examination n the year 2002 or
2003 for the said vacancies, the applicants would have certainly
participated in that examination itself. The contention of the respondents
hold good only if such an examination took place in 2002 and/or 2003 and
the applicants did not participate therein. That is not the case here. As
such, on account of the failure on the part of the Department in holding
the examination the applicants should not be made to suffer.
The Government cannot be permitted to take advantage of its own mistake.
In this regard the following decision of the Apex Court are relevant:-
(a) A.K. Lakshmipathy v. Rai Saheb PannalalH. Lahoti Charitable Trust,
(2010) 1 SCC 287
‘they cannot be allowed to take advantage of their own
mistake and conveniently pass on the blame to the respondents.’
(b) Rekha Mukherjee v. Ashis Kumar Das, (2005) 3 SCC 427
36, The respondents herein cannot take advantage of their
own mistake.
8. . . . . . . . . .
8. . . . . . . . . .
9. In view of the above the O.A. is
allowed. It is declared that the applicants are deemed to have been
promoted from the date the vacancy arose and thus notional date of
promotions is only for the purpose of reckoning the qualifying
service for pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972. The respondents are directed to pass suitable orders in this regard and make necessary entry in the service book of the applicants indicating clearly the date of notional
promotion and the purposes of reckoning the same.
service for pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972. The respondents are directed to pass suitable orders in this regard and make necessary entry in the service book of the applicants indicating clearly the date of notional
promotion and the purposes of reckoning the same.
10. Further, the respondents shall
collect necessary subscription under the provident fund rules during the
rest of their services and stop any recovery to the contributory provident
fund.
11. There shall be o orders as to
costs.’
5. This Tribunal is of the view that
though the post to which the applicants in Annexure A/8 order were
different from the post for which the applicants in the present O.A. have
applied, the reasonings stated in the afore-quoted paragraphs in Annexure
A/8 are squarely applicable to the facts in this case also. It was
submitted by the learned counsel for applicants that Annexure A/8 order
has attained finality without interference from any other superior forum.
6. The learned counsel for the Central
Government attempted to distinguish the case in Annexure A/8 order from
the present case by contending that applicants in the former case were
departmental candidates who were seeking promotion to their higher post
whereas in the present case, applicants are totally outsiders who had
taken part in an open competitive examination process knowing fully well
that they will be appointed only after 2004.
7. After hearing both sides this
Tribunal is of the view since the limited prayer of the applicant is to
treat the date of arising of the vacancy of the posts retrospectively as
their date of posting for the purpose of pension, it appears to this
Tribunal that the O.A. can be allowed as no other third party interest
is put in jeopardy and as the applicants will not be eligible for other
benefits like pay for the aforesaid period. Hence it is declared that the
applicants are deemed to have been appointed from the date the vacancy
arose and that they shall be included in the CCS (Pension) Rules 1972.
Respondents are directed to collect necessary subscription under the
Provident Fund Rules and the contributions collected from the applicants
under the new pension scheme shall be credited to their general provident
fund account. It is made clear that no other financial benefits including
increments and backwages have been granted to the applicants for the
aforesaid period.
8. The O.A. is disposed of on the
above terms. Parties are directed to suffer their own cost.