RTP ORDERS- HARIYANA CIRCLE 'HR 'DIVISION Ambala
Showing posts with label RTP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RTP. Show all posts
Saturday, October 04, 2014
Saturday, July 19, 2014
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
RTP CASE - News from AIPEUP3 CHQ
Next date of hearing of RTP case filed by NFPE, P-III and R-III CHQ at CAT Principal Bench Delhi is 04.01.2014.
Our main submission in the CAT is that RTP services should be counted as regular services for all purposes including pensionary benefits and especially for granting MACP promotions. In the recent judgment of the CAT Ernakulam Bench the CAT has ruled that RTP services SHALL NOT BE COUNTED FOR MACP promotions. Counting RTP services for TBOP/BCR alone will not give much benefit to employees. We want the entire RTP services should be counted for MACP.
Our main submission in the CAT is that RTP services should be counted as regular services for all purposes including pensionary benefits and especially for granting MACP promotions. In the recent judgment of the CAT Ernakulam Bench the CAT has ruled that RTP services SHALL NOT BE COUNTED FOR MACP promotions. Counting RTP services for TBOP/BCR alone will not give much benefit to employees. We want the entire RTP services should be counted for MACP.
Thursday, October 10, 2013
NFPE filed Case on RTP issues
FLASH NEWS:
Let us hope for the best.
(M. Krishnan)
General Secretary
NFPE, P3 CHQ & R3 CHQ FILED RTP CASE IN CAT PRINCIPAL BENCH DELHI ON 08.10.2013
NFPE, P3 CHQ & R3 CHQ has today jointly filed a case in
the CAT Principal Bench Delhi for counting of RTP Service as regular
service for all promotions and pensionary benefits. Case registration
No. 3647/2013 dated 08.10.2013.
Com.
S. K. Vyas Ji, Veteran Leader of the Confederation is our Advocate.
Hereafter there is no need for filing separate cases by employees.
Let us hope for the best.
(M. Krishnan)
General Secretary
http://www.aipeup3chq.com/
Wednesday, October 02, 2013
CAT Eranakulam O R D E R- Counting of service rendered by the applicants under theRTP for the purpose of seniority, benefits relating to financial upgradations and other consequential benefits is 1984 onwards
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
O.A. NO. 79 OF 2011, O.A. NO. 119 OF 2011,
O.A. NO. 988 OF 2011, O.A. NO. 31 OF 2012,
O.A. NO. 1150 OF 2012, O.A. NO. 1151 OF 2012
&
O.A. NO. 1014 OF 2010
Tuesday, this the 1st day of October, 2013
CORAM:
HON'BLE Dr.K.B.S.RAJAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Mr. K.GEORGE JOSEPH, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. O.A. NO. 79 OF 2011
K.S.Beena
Sub Postmaster
Malayattoor PO
Residing at Pattathil House
Manickamangalam PO
Kalady, Ernakulam District - 683 574 ... Applicant
(By Advocate Ms.Rekha Vasudevan)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices
Aluva Division
Aluva, Kerala - 683 101
5. The Director (Staff)
Department of Posts
Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi - 110 001 ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.S.Jamal, ACGSC)
2 O.A. NO. 119 OF 2011
1. G. Rajmohan, TC 25/1548,
West Thampanoor, Trivandrum 695001
(Office Assistant, Office of the SSPOs, Trivandrum 695001).
2. S. Viswanathan Nair, Chaarvakom, Vellayani,
Nemom P.O., Trivandrum - 695020
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
3. R. Hemalatha, Lekshmi Mandiram,
Chennakkod Perinad 691603
(SPM, East Kallada P.O.)
4. J. Girija Kumari, Sankarathil, Pottur West,
Mavadi P.O. 691507 (SPM, Nilamel P.O.)
5. V. Ganaselvam TC 40/946 (3), Saras 55C,
Sreevaraham, Manacaud P.O. 695009
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001 ).
6. T. Muthaiyan, TC 40/946 (3) Saras 55C
Sreevaraham, Manacaud P.O. 695009
(Postal Assistant, Vallakadavoo P.O. 695008).
7. S. Udayakumar, Souparnika KRIPA 77,
Mankulam Lane, Pappanamcode,
Trivandrum 695018
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
8. M. Suresh Kumar, Padmasree TC 9/2392 ANRA 136-c,
Edavacode, Trivandrum 695017
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
9. L. Sheela, Nandanam, TC 4/460-3, Ambalamukku,
Kaudiar, Trivandrum 695003
(Accountant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
10. M.P. Chandramohan,
Arun Nivas, Chettipurakal, Near Edaicode,
Kanyakumari 629152
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
11. R. Bhageerathi, TC 37/1901-1,
Karikattumadam, West Fort, Trivandrum 695023
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
12. Rema Paul, TC 7/1129-2 Vettamukku,
Trivandrum 695013
(Accountant, 0/0. SSPOs, Trivandrum 695001 ).
13. B.Sudharma, TC 11/966-1,
Thattinakam Nalanchira
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
14. Prabha J. Poovattil, House No. 65 Puliyur Gardens
Nalanchira P.O. (Sub Postmaster, Vattapara P.O. 695028).
15. M.A. Mary, TC 13/770/1 KVRA 322 Vanchiyur
Trivandrum 695035 (Postal Assistant, Tv. University P.O. 695034).
16. K. Vasuki, TC 13/416, Ambadi, Moolavilakam
Kunnukuzhy, Vanchiyoor P.O.
(Postal Assistant, Vanchiyur P.O. 695034).
17. V. Kasthuri Bai, 19/400, Chettiyarmadam,
Neyyur P.O. (Postal Assistant, Trivandrum AG's P.O. 695001).
18. S. Sulochana, KRA 99, Kedaram Nagar, Pattom Palace,
Trivandrum 695004
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
19. L. Rema, Postal Assistant, Deepasree
Sagara 92/2 Kudappanakunnu P.O. 695043
(Trivandrum AG's P.O. 695001).
20. G. Jayalakshmi, 10, Gayatri Gardens, Kaimanam
Trivandrum 695040 (Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001 ).
21. Rajalekshmi Antherjanam, VP/2/959 Nandanam, Ranni Lane,
Perorkada. (Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
22. A. Radha, TC 28/1935 Kizhakke Madam, Tv Fort P.O. 695023
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
23. S. Sreelatha, Sivoham Ottukal Street, Kaithamukku,
Tv Pettah P.O. 695024
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
24. S. Suma, Sumam TC 3/1280-1, KPRA 181,
Mankulam Lane, Pattom Palace P.O.
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
25. S. Usha Devi, Sreerangam Jyothi Nagar 81,
Kesavadasapuram, Trivandrum 695004.
(Sub Postmaster, Palkulangara P.O. Tv. Pettah 695024.)
26. T.P. Sreebhavani, Postal Assistant
Trivandrum GPO 695001
27. R. Krishna Kumari, 10 VKK Nagar, Vallakadavoo P.O
Trivandrum 695004 (Office Assistant, PSD, Trivandrum 695023.)
28. B. Vikraman Achary, Rajendra Sadanam
Kizhavoor, Mukhathala P.O. (SPM, Thekkevila P.O.)
29. S. Sairakumary, Gopa Kripa, Asramom Garden 75
Asramom P.O. 695002 (SPM, Eravipuram P.O.)
30. G. Ushakumary, Madhava Vilasom, Melode, Adur
(APM Adur Kerala HO.)
31. V. Aji, Vathiyarvila Veedu, Edakida, Ezhukone
(SPM Odanavattom P.O.)
32. P .S. Letha, Swathi, Bhoothakulam P.O
(SPM, Bhoothakulam P.O.)
33. Leena Bhasker, Manohara, Kottapuram, Paravur P.O
(Postal Assistant, Bhoothakulam P.O.)
34. N. Sheela, Santhram, Ayirakuzhy, Chithara P.O
(SPM, Chithara P.O.)
35. J.R. Mallika Devi, Sreedarshan, Palace Nagar 12A
Thevally P.O. (SPM, Thirumullavaram 691012)
36. S. Remadevi, Kalpakom, Kulangara bhagom
Chavara P.O. (SPM Neendakara P.O.)
37. A. Vijayalekshmi Amma, Neduvathuvila Veedu
Cheriyela, Alammoodu, Mukhathala P.O.
(Office Assistant, SSPOs, Kollam 691001.)
38. K. Vijalekshmi, Sreelekshmi, MNRA 108
Ramankulangara, Kavanad P.O
(Office Assistant, SSPOs Kollam 691001.)
39. K. Syamala, Amaravathy, Mampallikunnam,
Chathannoor P.O. (Postal Assistant Kottiyam P.O.)
40. L.S. Sylvia, Soma Bhavan, Mayyanad P.O.
(Postal Assistant, Kollam HO.)
41. T. Girija, Ayaira, CKP Perinad
Postal Assistant, Kollam HO.)
42. S. Sunila. Kollasseril. Prayar P.O. 690547
(SPM. Athinad North P.O.)
43. Lekha Ravindran, Sreevalsam, Padasouth,
Karunagappally P.O. (SPM, Kulasekharapuram P.O.)
44. P. Unnikrishnan Nair, Krishna Vilasam,
Mavarakonam, Kalluvathukkal
(SPM, Thekkumbhagam P.O.)
45. T.Mathews Mathew, Thayyil Kizhakkedathil
Perumpuzha PO 691 504
(Postal Assistant, Kollam HO)
46. R. Renuka Devi, Sreevignesh, MCRA 103
Thirumullavaram P.O. (Postal Assistant, Kollam Civil Station).
47. C. Lilly, Layam, Gandhi Mukku, Kottarakara P.O
(Postal Assistant, Kollam HO.)
48. L. Anantharamalekshmi, Vasantham, Devi Nagar 342
Thirumullavaram P.O. 691012 (SPM, Thevally P.O.)
49. J. R. Padmaja Devi, Aramom, Shoba, Thirumullavaram P.O.
( Postal Assistant, Kollam Cutchery P.O.)
50. R. Sureshkumar, Suranya, Thazham North, Chathannoor P.O.
(Postal Assistant, Thangassery P.O.)
51. P. Sheeba, Rohini, Thottumkara, Mayyanad P.O
(SPM, Pullichira P.O.)
52. P.J. George Kutty, Parasseril House, Melkavu, Kottayam H.O.
Postal Assistant, Kottayam H.O.)
53. S. Alex, Junior Accountant, Velliavilai (Aruganthottu Vilai)
Palappallam P.O. 629159, Kanyakumari District
(Office of the Director of Postal Accounts, Trivandrum).
54. A. Meetheen Pillay, 9/1, Sabnam, Near Govt. Higher
Secondary School, Thiruvithamcode P.O.
(Senior Accountant, Office of the DAP, Trivandrum).
55. S. Lakshmi, TC 20/2876, Hari Saras, SRA 193,
Karamana P.O. 695002
(Sub Postmaster, Tv Govt. Press P.O
Trivandrum 695001) ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Laila Sunil)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 001
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram.
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Thiruvananthapuram Division
Thiruvananthapuram.
5. The Superintendent of Post Offices
Kollam Division, Kollam
6. The Superintendent of Post Offices
Pathanamthitta Division, Pathanamthitta
7. The Superintendent of Post Offices
Kolttayam Division, Kottayam
8. The Director (Staff)
Department of Posts
Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi - 110 001 ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, ACGSC)
3. O.A. NO. 988 OF 2011
1. D. Sheela
Jaya Bhavan, Agarathuvila, Kadavattaraam
Neyyattinkara 695121 (Accountant, MACP II, HRO RMS,
Trivandrum Division, Trivandrum 695001).
2. T.S. Jayalekshmi
5-A, Sun Elegance, Kesavan Nair Road, Poojapura P.O.,
Thiruvananthapuram 695012.
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
3. V.S. Kumari Sudha
Ashtamy, College Road, Dhanuvachapuram 695503
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
4. P. Padmavathy, TC 58/963,
Chithirai, Padassery Lane, Attukal, Manacaud P.O
Thiruvananthapuram - 695009
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division,
Trivandrum 695001).
5. S. Jalajambika , Shanmugha Vilasam
Theviyode, Vithura P.O. 695551
(OA, MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
6. L. Usha Devi, TC4/935,
Sree Chitira Nagar, Kurisuvilakathu Veedu,
Kowdiar P.O., Thiruvananthapuram 695003
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division,
Trivandrum 695001).
7. L. Seethalekshmi Amma, Anjanam, TC-6/281 (23)
Nethaji Road, Prasanthi Gardens, Vattiyurkavu P.O.,
Thiruvananthapuram 695013
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
8. S. Vijayakumari
Thulaseedharan, V.T. Bhavan, Dhanuvachapuram P.O. 695503
(SA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
9. M. Spain Rose, Thoufeek, House No. 15,
Vikhas Nagar, Ambalathara, Poonthura P.O
Thiruvananthapuram 695026
(Accountant MACP II, BPC, Trivandrum 695023).
10. V. Vanajakumari,
Devika, TC 22/583 (3) Konchira Vila, Manacaud P.O
Thiruvananthapuram 695009
(SA MACP II, BPC, Trivandrum 695023). ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Laila Sunil)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi.
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 001
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram.
4. The Senior Superintendent, R.M.S.
Thiruvananthapuram Division,
Thiruvananthapuram 695036.
5. The Director (Staff),
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi 110001. ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mrs.Deepthi Mary Varghese, ACGSC)
4. O.A. NO. 31 OF 2012
1. Jose Mathew
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Chennathu House, Chengalam P.O.
Kottayam District- 686 585
2 . P.R Sureshkumar,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Pullatu, S H Mount P.O., Kottayam_ 686 006
3. K.P.Sulochana Devi,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at C-1I1-3, P & T Quarters, I
Muttambalam, Kottayam-4
4. V.Anjanakumari,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Sreevilasam, Kumaranalloor P.O
Kottayam-686 016
5. R Sobhakumari, D
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Kolamkuzhiyil, Anicad East P.O., Kottayam
6. Kuruvilla Varghese,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Vattamala (H), Velloor P.O, Pampady, Kottayam
7. P.K.Geetha Devi,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Karipal House, Vadavathoor, Kottayam
8. K.K.Ramani,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kollam,
Residing at Krishnakripa, FFRA-85, Mundakkal East, KolIam-1
9. G.Hariprakash,
Sorting Assistant MACP II
Sub Record Office, RMS TV Division, Kollam
Residing at Palvila Puthenveedu, Near BHS, Attingal.
10. V.Rajkumar,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kollam,
Residing at Muruga Bhavan, Surianalle P.O.
Munnar(via), Idukki District 685 618
11. V.P. Sujeendra Babu
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Thiruvalla,
Residing at Valavunkal House, Kunthrickal P.O.
Thalavady, Thiruvalla, Alappuzha -689 572
12. Roy T Eapen,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office
RMS TV Division, Thiruvalla,
Residing at Thayyil house, Velliara P.O.,
Ayroor North, Pathanamthitta- 689 612
13. K.Ponraj,
` Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Thiruvalla,
Residing at Rajbhavan, Melady, Marayur P.O
Idukki District - 685 620
14. P.Gireesh Kumar,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Alappuzha,
Residing at Krishnapuri, North Aryad,
Mannancherry P.O., Alappuzha- 688538
15. P.J.Aleykutty,
TBOP Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office
RMS TV Division, Thiruvalla, residing at CA II,
P& T Quarters, Alappuzha
16. M.V.Jayasree,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Alappuzha,
Residing at Ambady, Varanad P.O., Cherthala,
Alappuzha. ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Rekha Vasudevan)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi.
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 001
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram.
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
R.M.S. T.V Division,
Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
5. The Director (Staff),
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi 110001. ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.Millu Dandapani, ACGSC (R1-4)
5. O.A. NO. 1150 OF 2012
1. M. J. Leela,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Thadavanal House,
Arakulam P.O., Idukki- 685 591
2. P.D.Philip,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division
residing at Pazhoor House, Puthenchira,
Muthalakodam P.O., Idukki-685 505
3. T.K.Rajeev,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division
residing at Thekkemoozhickal, Kurumpalamattom
Karimannoor P.O., Idukki-685 581
4. I. Indira,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Narayana Mangalam, Muvattupuzha- 686 661
5. Baby Joseph
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office, Railway Mail Service,
Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Palekudiyil, Ayavana P.O., Idukki- 686 668
6 Jessy Augustine
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division
Residing at Padinjarekara, Puthepura, Karimpana P.O.,
Koothattukulam 686662
7. P. Letchmanan,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office, Railway Mail Service,
Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Augraham House,
Marayur P.O., Idukki-686 520
8. M.B.Karunakaran,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office, Railway Mail Service,
Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Madapparayil House,
Muvattupuzha P.O.- 686 661 ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Rekha Vasudevan)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi- 110 001
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala - 695 033
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram., Kerala - 695 033
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division,
Ernakulam - 682 011
5. The Director (Staff),
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi 110001. ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.Millu Dandapani, ACGSC )
6. O.A. NO. 1151 OF 2012
1 R. Girija,
Office Assistant, Divisional Office,
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Puramadathil House, Edamuruku,
Cheenikuzhi P.O., Udumbanoor - 685595
2. B. Vijayakumar,
Office Assistant, Divisional Office,
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Souparnika, Chittoor, Puthuperiyaram P.O.,
Vengallur- 685608
3. O. R. Girija,
Postal Assistant, Thodupuzha Head Office
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Thekkanathu House,
Thodupuzha East P.O., Kanjiramattom,
Idukki 685 585
4. Santhy Jose,
Postal Assistant, Thodupuzha East
Department of Post, Idukki Division
Residing at Elavunkal House, Thodupuzha East P.O.
Idukki 685 585
5. M.S.Lathika Devi
Postal Assistant, Thodupuzha Head Office
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Mangalamundakal
Thodupuzha East, Idukki 685 585.
6 Anitha T.R.
Postal Assistant, Karimanur,
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Kunnumpurath, Thodupuzha, Idukki
7. N. Harikumar,
Postal Assistant, Muthalakodam Sub Office,
Thodupuzha, Department of Post,
Idukki Division,
Residing at Puthenveedu, Kolani P.O
Thodupuzha, Idukki
8 Nixon John,
Sub Postmaster, Thodupuzha East,
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Palammattam House,
Chittoor, Puthupariyaram P.O
Vengalloor, Idukki- 685 608 ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Rekha Vasudevan)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi- 110 001
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala - 695 033
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram., Kerala - 695 033
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Idukki Division, Thodupuzha, Kerala - 685 584
5. The Director (Staff),
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi 110001. ... Respondents
(By Advocate Ms.Deepthi Mary Varghese, ACGSC)
7. O.A. NO. 1014 OF 2010
P.Premalatha
Sub Postmaster, Angamali South
Ernakulam District
Residing at Latha Vilas House
Manickamangalam P.O
Kalady - 683 574 ... Applicant
(By Advocate Mr.TCG Swamy)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications & IT
(Department of Posts), Dak Bhavan
New Delhi- 110 116
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Postal Circle, Thiruvananthapuram
3. The Post Master General
Central Region, Kochi
4. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,
Aluva Postal Division, Aluva
Ernakulam District ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.Sunil Jacob Jose, SCGSC)
These applications having been heard on 22.08.2013, the Tribunal on
01.10.2013 delivered the following order:
O R D E R
HON'BLE Dr.K.B.S.RAJAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
As the issue involved in the above cases is one and the same, the
same are dealt with in this common order. However, as a leading case,
facts as well as reference as contained in OA No. 79 of 2011 have been
taken for the purpose of discussion.
2. Counting of service rendered by the applicants under the Reserve
Trained Pool system for the purpose of seniority, benefits relating to financial
upgradations and other consequential benefits is the issue involved in these
cases.
3. Sometimes in the eighties, the respondents had introduced a
system called Reserve Trained Pool (RTP for short) vide order dated 30-10-
1980, at Annexure A-1. The salient feature of this system includes that
when posts of Postal Assistants and Sorting Assistants were filled in each
recruitment unit, while drawing a list of selected candidates equivalent to the
number of vacancies to be filled up, an additional list upto 50% of the
vacancies would be prepared and these would also be imparted training and
categorized as trained reserve candidates and kept in reserve, to meet the
future regular and current emergent needs of manpower in the Post and
RMS Offices. In other words, these RTP candidates could be compared to
wait-listed candidates with an assurance of regularization against future
vacancies.
4. Such a list was prepared in which all the applicants in the above
O.As figured and their services were utilized for emergent needs. In view of
the imposition of ban on direct recruitment from 1984 to 1990, these RTP
were not regularized against any of the vacancies that arose during the
above period. It was only in 1990 that such vacancies were filled up by
absorption of the aforesaid RTP candidates.
5. A number of Original Applications were filed by the RTP
candidates including some of the applicants in these O.As, during 1990 and
1991 praying for a declaration that the applicants were entitled to get the
benefit of their services commencing from the date of their initial
engagement as RTP PAs for the purpose of annual increment, bonus, length
of service for the purpose of departmental examination and for seniority and
other purposes and for a direction to the respondents to afford the applicants
the consequential benefits arising from such declaration. These O.As, with
814 of 90 as the main case were decided vide Annexure A-6 order dated
21-04-1992 whereby the Tribunal directed the respondents to afford such of
the RTP candidates who had rendered continuous service of over one year
at 8 hours a day, temporary status and count half such service as qualifying
service for pension and all the benefits available to casual mazdoors having
been granted temporary status would also percolate upon such RTP
candidates from the date of their temporary status. This order was followed
in subsequent applications as well, vide orders at Annexures A-9 and A-10.
The decision in OA No. 814 of 1990 was under challenge before the Apex
Court and the same was then pending.
6. Four individuals similarly circumscribed as the applicants in these
O.As, filed a case before the Tribunal and the Tribunal, after referring the
matter to the Industrial Tribunal for fact finding purposes, held that such
persons be granted seniority with reference to the initial date of their
appointment. Annexure A-11 order dated 8th February, 1996 refers. The
order was implemented, whereby these individuals were accordingly granted
seniority from the date of their initial appointment.
7. The challenge against decision in OA No. 814 of 1990 and
connected cases (vide Annexure A-6) which was challenged by the
respondents herein before the Apex Court, was decided and the Apex Court
vide judgment reported in Union of India vs K.N. Sivadas (1997) 7 SCC 30
held that there is no comparison between the RTP and casual labourers as
these two are under two different schemes. The Apex court has thus held in
that judgment as under:-
"The position of these two categories of employees is very
different as we have already set out. The Tribunal has also
erred in assuming that casual labourers are getting these
benefits during the period for which the RTPs are claiming
these benefits. RTPs have already obtained the benefit of
absorption in regular service because of their own scheme.
They, therefore, cannot, on the one hand, avail of their own
special scheme and at the same time, claim additional
benefits on the basis of what has been given to the casual
labourers. This is unwarranted, especially as the period for
which they claim these benefits is the period during which
such benefits were not available to casual labourers."
8. OA 1178 of 1996 was filed by a number of such RTP candidates,
seeking the benefit of regularization from retrospective effect but the same
was rejected by the Tribunal and the matter was taken up with the High
Court, which too, after detailed discussion rejected the writ petition No.
21249 of 2000 vide Annexure A-12.
9. Well before the above order was passed, the Jabalpur Bench of
the Tribunal dealt with identical case and passed Annexure A-7 order dated
16th December, 1986 whereby the following directions were given:-
"10. Under the circumstances, to end the unreasonable and
unjust classification that had been introduced as the result of
dual policy of the Government as reflected in the issue of the
circular (Annexure R1) and the stopping of further
recruitment and absorption to the cadre of posts of Postal
Assistants, as affirmed in para 8 of the Respondent's return
dated 24.6.1985, we direct that:-
a. Government shall review their policy to stop
recruitment/absorption of persons against regular
Postal Assistants.
b. No persons shall be inducted from other
Departments like Railway Mail Service and
Telecommunication Department to man posts of
Postal assistants until the petitioners are absorbed
against regular posts.
c. No fresh persons be taken and recruited against
the R.T.P. (Reserve Trained Pool) until the
Government reviews their policy as under (a)
above. The operation of the circular dated
31.10.1980 (Annexure R1) in regard to recruitment
of fresh persons to R.T.P. other than petitioners is
struck down in exercise of this Tribunal's writ
jurisdiction.
d. The absorption of the petitioners against regular
posts will be so phased on the basis of para 2 of
circular dated 30.10.1980, as if no restriction had
been imposed on their regular
recruitment/absorption earlier and shall be
completed within a reasonable period from the date
of this order, if necessary by creating
supernumerary posts, and subject to screening of
the unfit by a specially constituted screening
committee to examine their record and
performance. The Screening Committee shall also
keep in view their seniority in the R.T.P.
11. x x x x
12. Under the circumstances, for reasons stated in the
preceding paragraph, we find the provisions of the circular
dated 30.10.1980 (Annexure R1) in so far they relate to
payment of hourly rates of wages to employees in the R.T.P.
discriminatory and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the
Constitution and are struck down. We direct respondents that
the R.T.P. Employees performing the same duties as Postal
Assistants shall be paid the same salary and emoluments per
mensem as are being received by Postal Assistants with effect
from the date of their appointment. As regards other conditions
of service and facilities demanded by the petitioners this is
subject to their regular absorption as directed in para 10."
10. The above decision of Jabalpur Bench was challenged before the
Apex Court in SLP (C) No. 11313 of 1997 which was however, dismissed.
This decision was followed in a subsequent decision by the Bombay Bench
in OA No. 719 of 1996 and 8 other connected cases, vide order dated 31st
August, 2010 at Annexure A-30.
11. Similarly, the Madras Bench of the Tribunal had also dealt with
identical issue and by its order dated 25-02-1988, direction was given for
absorption of the RTP candidates against regular vacancies in the order of
merit in the Reserved Trained Pool from the date next regular vacancies in
their turn materialized. Annexure A-8 refers.
12. When a scheme called Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP for
short) was introduced in 1983, the same provided for automatic promotion
on completion of 16 years of service as Postal Assistant or Sorting Assistant.
The stipulation of 16 years of service was interpreted by the respondents as
16 years of regular service and a case was filed by one Mathivanan who was
an RTP candidate, selected for the Army Postal Service and his appointment
prior to his entry in the Army Postal Service was purely ad hoc. The matter
reached upto the Apex court and the Apex Court had held that since the
term 'regular' was not figuring with the term "sixteen years of service"
notwithstanding the fact there was no regular service but the individual
completed 16 years of service, he was granted the benefit of the TBOP
Scheme. Judgment of the Apex Court - Union of India vs M. Mathivanan
(2006) 6 SCC 57 refers. This decision was uniformly applied to all similarly
situated till 31-08-2008 after which the TBOP Scheme was replaced by
MACP Scheme, vide Annexure A-15.
13. The applicant in OA No. 79 of 2011 had moved two
representations, vide Annexure A-13 and A-17, inviting the attention of the
respondents to the decision vide Annexure A-11 which was implemented by
the respondents and sought similar relief. The two representations have not
been responded to by the respondents.
14. The respondent No. 1 had, vide Annexure A-29 passed an order,
referring to various decisions, to the effect that while TBOP scheme did not
specifically refer to regular service, the subsequent MACP scheme having
specifically utilized the term "regular service", the services rendered prior to
regularization of the RTP candidates be not reckoned while considering the
eligibility for grant of MACP.
15. The above order of the respondents is under challenge and the
applicants in all these O.As have claimed almost identical reliefs. The
reliefs sought in the main OA 79/11 are reproduced hereunder:-
(a) Declare that the applicant is entitled to be
accommodated against the regular vacancy which arose in
the year 1984, i.e. the next recruiting year subsequent to
her selection as Short Duty Postal Assistant in 1983, as
directed by the Jabalpur Bench of this Hon'ble Tribunal in
Annexure A-7 final order and to direct the respondents to
grant her regular absorption with effect from the date if the
regular vacancy which arose in the year 1984, .e the next
recruiting year subsequent to her selection as Short Duty
Postal Assistant in 1983 and to refix her seniority and other
consequential service benefits accordingly.
(b) Direct the respondents to count her service
rendered as Reserve Trained Pool for the purpose of
granting the financial upgradation under the Time Bound
One Promotion Scheme and the Modified Assured Career
Progression Scheme.
(c) Quash Annexures A-29 letter dated 12.04.2012
issued by the Director (Staff), Ministry of Communications &
IT.
16. Respondents have contested the O.A. They have highlighted the
aspect of limitation on the one hand and laid stress that the decision in
Mathivanan would apply to those who were similarly situated as the said
Mathivanan (APS).
17. Counsel for the applicants argued that the respondents had
eclipsed the existence of the decision by the Jabalpur Bench when the case
of Sivadas was considered by the Tribunal as well as the Apex Court. The
decision in Sivadas in fact only compared the status of the RTP and casual
labourers with temporary status. The benefit of service prior to regularization
had been granted for the purpose of TBOP as per the information gathered
under RTI. The applicants are entitled to the reliefs sought for, on the
strength of Annexure A-7 order of the Jabalpur Bench as well as Annexure
A-11 order of this Bench. Restricting the benefit of Annexure A-11 order to
the applicants therein alone is illegal as the decision in that case has to be
taken as applicable for all similarly situated.
18. Counsel for the applicant in OA No. 1014 of 2010 submitted that the
case of the applicant in that OA is slightly different from the other cases in
that, in that case, the applicant filed OA No. 323 of 11 and the same was
disposed of by order dated 13 Feb. 2012 . The direction given to the
respondent in that order that the respondents would consider the case of the
applicant for financial upgradation under MACP duly taking into account the
services rendered as RTP candidate without the benefit of seniority and
would take appropriate decision and intimate the decision within a time of six
months. The respondents had accordingly, considered but the rejected the
case of the applicant by order dated 28-05-2012 stating that vide the
Directorate Instructions dated 12-04-2012 and in view of the judgment in the
case of K.N. Sivadas and provisions contained in the MACP scheme it was
concluded that the services rendered under RTP scheme by the personnel
prior to their regular appointment of PA/SA cannot be counted for promotion,
seniority and grant of MACP. Thus, the case of the applicant was rejected.
The counsel submitted that the direction as per A-6 order dated 13-02-2012
was to the first respondent viz., the Secretary, Ministry of Communications,
Dept of Posts, whereas the rejection letter came from the Chief Postmaster
General. The rejection order is without application of mind as the
respondents had failed to take into account the factum of having conceded
before the Tribunal in OA No. 323 of 2011.
19. Counsel for the respondents maintained the same contention of
limitation as well as non permissibility of counting of the services prior to
regularization in respect of grant of MACP.
20. Arguments were heard and documents perused. Sivadas only
distinguished the cases covered by RTP scheme on the one hand and
Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status) Scheme on the other and
held that the former, who is better placed, cannot claim any benefit available
to the latter in addition to the ones available under the RTP Scheme. The
Apex Court in that case did not examine the scope or extent of the benefits
available to the RTP, save stating that the benefits available under that
scheme alone would have to be afforded to RTP and not in addition thereto
the benefits available to the temporary status casual labourers. Mathivanan
held that for grant of TBOP regular service need not be insisted and thus
services rendered in the APS could be reckoned for the purpose of working
out the eligibility of grant of TBOP. In fact, order dated 21st July, 2010 vide
Annexure A-15 was passed in pursuance of the decision of the Apex Court
in Mathivanan. The contention of the respondents is that the said decision
would apply to cases where an RTP candidate, granted ad hoc status prior
to deputation to APS was later sent to APS and would not apply to those
who remained as RTP candidates throughout till their regularization in 1990.
21. The claim of the applicants in these O.As is not related to any
such benefits as in the case of Sivadas. At the same time, the fact remains
that there is an observation by the Apex Court about the superior status of
the RTPs compared to that of casual labourers with temporary status. This
is evident from the observation of the High Court in para 3 of Annexure A-12,
wherein it has been observed, "The apex Court further held that R.T.Ps are
better placed...". This observation cannot be lost sight of.
22. Mathivanan dealt with the entitlement of ad hoc services to be
reckoned for TBOP, which scheme did not stipulate 16 years of 'regular'
service but only insisted on 16 years of service in the grade. The ratio in
that decision is that services rendered irrespective of whether the same were
regular or otherwise would count.
23. Admittedly, from 1984 there had been a ban on direct recruitment on
account of which alone, it was not possible for the respondents to regularize
the services of a number of RTPs inducted in early 1980s. It is not the case
of the respondents that there arose no vacancies during the period of ban.
But for the clamping of the ban, many of the RTPs would have been
absorbed against regular vacancies in their turn. In fact, in another decision
in OA No. 323 of 2012 decided on 13trh February, 2012 (filed by the
applicant in OA No. 1014 of 2010), this Bench of the Tribunal had
considered an identical case and recorded vide para 16 thereof, "In view of
this fact, the respondents have fairly conceded that the issue of counting the
services of RTP candidate for financial upgrdation under MACP on purely
personal basis without any benefit of seniority is under active consideration
of the Respondents." Of course, the aforesaid consideration culminated in
the impugned order dated 12th April, 2012 vide Annexure A-29. Therein, the
decision was that there is a striking difference in respect of qualifying service
under TBOP and MACP Scheme, in that for the former, the requirement was
only 16 years of service, while in the latter the requirement is 'regular
service.' And in respect of TBOP, from the information received under RTI
by the applicants, some cases of RTP candidates were favourably
considered for grant of TBOP and some were under consideration etc., vide
Annexures A-21 to A-28. The decision in Mathivanan to reckon the service
prior to regular service was not on the specific reason that the individual
joined APS to confine the benefits to those who had joined APS. It only
considered whether service prior to regularization could be reckoned or not.
From this point of view, there cannot be an intelligible differentia between
those of the RTPs who had joined APS and who had not to deny the
benefits of the decision in Mathivanan to the applicants. All the RTP
candidates should be considered at par.
24. As regards challenge to order dated 28-5-2012 in OA NO. 1014 of
2010, the decision conveyed to the applicant was in the wake of
communication from the Directorate dated 12-04-2012 (Annexure A-29 in the
other OA No. 79 of 2011). As such, the same cannot be said to be the
decision of the Chief PMG. Further, the order dated 13-02-2012 referred to
the admission of the respondents only to the extent that the issue of counting
of service as RTP candidate for financial upgradation on purely personal
basis was only 'under consideration' of the respondents. It does not seem to
be an assurance to give any financial benefits under thereof, when the
conditions attached to the MACP scheme does not get fulfilled.
25. In so far as the challenge to Annexure A29 order dated 12th April,
2012 is concerned, the challenge is not legally sustainable. In its decision in
the case of M.Mathivanan, the Apex Court has distinguished regular service
and service simplicitor. In so far as TBOP is concerned, the requirement was
not regular service and accordingly those who had put in 16 years of service
(need not one of regular) were also to be covered by the TBOP Scheme.
However, a specific stipulation of regular service has been provided for in
respect of MACP which substituted TBOP Scheme. As such, Para 7 of the
said order at Annexure A29 is legally sustainable. Thus the entire case could
be converged to the following extent:-
(a) In so far as reckoning of service for the purpose of
grant of TBOP benefits there is no difference between a
RTP candidate whose services were regularized later on
and an RTP candidate who was sent to APS and was
reverted after his deputation period, The decision of the
Apex Court in M.Mathivanan is, therefore, applicable to all
those RTPs irrespective of whether they were sent to APS
or not.
(b) In so far as MACP is concerned, the period of service
shall be reckoned only from the date of regular service
disregarding the services rendered prior to regularization.
(d) For grant of 2nd financial up-gradation under the
MACP Scheme, it shall be only the regular service that has
to be counted and not 10 years after the grant of TBOP
benefits, since TBOP benefits were granted without taking
into account the regular service.
(e) There is no question of regularization from the date of
initial appointment or from the date vacancy arose, much
less seniority on the basis of such regularization as the
same had been rejected by the High Court vide judgment at
Annexure A-12 already referred to.
26. In view of the above, the only benefit that could be available to the
applicants is that in so far as grant of TBOP is concerned, if the respondents
have taken into account only the regular service and not the service before
regularization they should take into account such service as well. Since
vacancies of 1984 onwards could not be filled up due to ban on recruitment
and the applicants were serving as RTPs during these years, the services
rendered by them from 1984 to 1990 or thereafter till the date of
regularization should be considered as service that could be reckoned for
working out the eligibility for benefits of TBOP Scheme.
27. In view of the above, all these Original Applications are disposed of
with direction to the respondents as under:-
(a) Respondents shall work out the vacancies that arose
from 1984 onwards, which could not be filled up on on
account of the ban on recruitment.
(b) RTP candidates on the basis of their year of
recruitment, coupled with the order of merit, shall be
accommodated notionally against such vacancies that
were lying unfilled from 1984 onwards.
(c) It is from the date on which these applicants could be
deemed to have been placed against such vacancies that
the period of 16 years of service for grant of TBOP benefits
shall be worked out.
(d) On completion of 16 years of such service, they
would be deemed to have been granted TBOP benefits
and the pay in the higher scale shall be fixed.
(e) Arrears shall be worked out in respect of these
cases and the same shall be payable to the applicants
concerned.
(f) In so far as MACP is concerned, the period of 20
years for 2nd MACP shall be reckoned only from the date of
regular appointment and those who are entitled to 2nd
MACP financial benefits accordingly shall be afforded the
same, if not already done.
28. The above order shall be complied with, within a period of six
months from the date of communication of this order. No order as to costs.
Dated, the 1st October, 2013.
K.GEORGE JOSEPH Dr.K.B.S.RAJAN
ADMINISTARTIOVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
vs
ERNAKULAM BENCH
O.A. NO. 79 OF 2011, O.A. NO. 119 OF 2011,
O.A. NO. 988 OF 2011, O.A. NO. 31 OF 2012,
O.A. NO. 1150 OF 2012, O.A. NO. 1151 OF 2012
&
O.A. NO. 1014 OF 2010
Tuesday, this the 1st day of October, 2013
CORAM:
HON'BLE Dr.K.B.S.RAJAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE Mr. K.GEORGE JOSEPH, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. O.A. NO. 79 OF 2011
K.S.Beena
Sub Postmaster
Malayattoor PO
Residing at Pattathil House
Manickamangalam PO
Kalady, Ernakulam District - 683 574 ... Applicant
(By Advocate Ms.Rekha Vasudevan)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices
Aluva Division
Aluva, Kerala - 683 101
5. The Director (Staff)
Department of Posts
Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi - 110 001 ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.S.Jamal, ACGSC)
2 O.A. NO. 119 OF 2011
1. G. Rajmohan, TC 25/1548,
West Thampanoor, Trivandrum 695001
(Office Assistant, Office of the SSPOs, Trivandrum 695001).
2. S. Viswanathan Nair, Chaarvakom, Vellayani,
Nemom P.O., Trivandrum - 695020
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
3. R. Hemalatha, Lekshmi Mandiram,
Chennakkod Perinad 691603
(SPM, East Kallada P.O.)
4. J. Girija Kumari, Sankarathil, Pottur West,
Mavadi P.O. 691507 (SPM, Nilamel P.O.)
5. V. Ganaselvam TC 40/946 (3), Saras 55C,
Sreevaraham, Manacaud P.O. 695009
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001 ).
6. T. Muthaiyan, TC 40/946 (3) Saras 55C
Sreevaraham, Manacaud P.O. 695009
(Postal Assistant, Vallakadavoo P.O. 695008).
7. S. Udayakumar, Souparnika KRIPA 77,
Mankulam Lane, Pappanamcode,
Trivandrum 695018
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
8. M. Suresh Kumar, Padmasree TC 9/2392 ANRA 136-c,
Edavacode, Trivandrum 695017
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
9. L. Sheela, Nandanam, TC 4/460-3, Ambalamukku,
Kaudiar, Trivandrum 695003
(Accountant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
10. M.P. Chandramohan,
Arun Nivas, Chettipurakal, Near Edaicode,
Kanyakumari 629152
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
11. R. Bhageerathi, TC 37/1901-1,
Karikattumadam, West Fort, Trivandrum 695023
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
12. Rema Paul, TC 7/1129-2 Vettamukku,
Trivandrum 695013
(Accountant, 0/0. SSPOs, Trivandrum 695001 ).
13. B.Sudharma, TC 11/966-1,
Thattinakam Nalanchira
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
14. Prabha J. Poovattil, House No. 65 Puliyur Gardens
Nalanchira P.O. (Sub Postmaster, Vattapara P.O. 695028).
15. M.A. Mary, TC 13/770/1 KVRA 322 Vanchiyur
Trivandrum 695035 (Postal Assistant, Tv. University P.O. 695034).
16. K. Vasuki, TC 13/416, Ambadi, Moolavilakam
Kunnukuzhy, Vanchiyoor P.O.
(Postal Assistant, Vanchiyur P.O. 695034).
17. V. Kasthuri Bai, 19/400, Chettiyarmadam,
Neyyur P.O. (Postal Assistant, Trivandrum AG's P.O. 695001).
18. S. Sulochana, KRA 99, Kedaram Nagar, Pattom Palace,
Trivandrum 695004
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
19. L. Rema, Postal Assistant, Deepasree
Sagara 92/2 Kudappanakunnu P.O. 695043
(Trivandrum AG's P.O. 695001).
20. G. Jayalakshmi, 10, Gayatri Gardens, Kaimanam
Trivandrum 695040 (Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001 ).
21. Rajalekshmi Antherjanam, VP/2/959 Nandanam, Ranni Lane,
Perorkada. (Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001).
22. A. Radha, TC 28/1935 Kizhakke Madam, Tv Fort P.O. 695023
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
23. S. Sreelatha, Sivoham Ottukal Street, Kaithamukku,
Tv Pettah P.O. 695024
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
24. S. Suma, Sumam TC 3/1280-1, KPRA 181,
Mankulam Lane, Pattom Palace P.O.
(Postal Assistant, Trivandrum GPO 695001)
25. S. Usha Devi, Sreerangam Jyothi Nagar 81,
Kesavadasapuram, Trivandrum 695004.
(Sub Postmaster, Palkulangara P.O. Tv. Pettah 695024.)
26. T.P. Sreebhavani, Postal Assistant
Trivandrum GPO 695001
27. R. Krishna Kumari, 10 VKK Nagar, Vallakadavoo P.O
Trivandrum 695004 (Office Assistant, PSD, Trivandrum 695023.)
28. B. Vikraman Achary, Rajendra Sadanam
Kizhavoor, Mukhathala P.O. (SPM, Thekkevila P.O.)
29. S. Sairakumary, Gopa Kripa, Asramom Garden 75
Asramom P.O. 695002 (SPM, Eravipuram P.O.)
30. G. Ushakumary, Madhava Vilasom, Melode, Adur
(APM Adur Kerala HO.)
31. V. Aji, Vathiyarvila Veedu, Edakida, Ezhukone
(SPM Odanavattom P.O.)
32. P .S. Letha, Swathi, Bhoothakulam P.O
(SPM, Bhoothakulam P.O.)
33. Leena Bhasker, Manohara, Kottapuram, Paravur P.O
(Postal Assistant, Bhoothakulam P.O.)
34. N. Sheela, Santhram, Ayirakuzhy, Chithara P.O
(SPM, Chithara P.O.)
35. J.R. Mallika Devi, Sreedarshan, Palace Nagar 12A
Thevally P.O. (SPM, Thirumullavaram 691012)
36. S. Remadevi, Kalpakom, Kulangara bhagom
Chavara P.O. (SPM Neendakara P.O.)
37. A. Vijayalekshmi Amma, Neduvathuvila Veedu
Cheriyela, Alammoodu, Mukhathala P.O.
(Office Assistant, SSPOs, Kollam 691001.)
38. K. Vijalekshmi, Sreelekshmi, MNRA 108
Ramankulangara, Kavanad P.O
(Office Assistant, SSPOs Kollam 691001.)
39. K. Syamala, Amaravathy, Mampallikunnam,
Chathannoor P.O. (Postal Assistant Kottiyam P.O.)
40. L.S. Sylvia, Soma Bhavan, Mayyanad P.O.
(Postal Assistant, Kollam HO.)
41. T. Girija, Ayaira, CKP Perinad
Postal Assistant, Kollam HO.)
42. S. Sunila. Kollasseril. Prayar P.O. 690547
(SPM. Athinad North P.O.)
43. Lekha Ravindran, Sreevalsam, Padasouth,
Karunagappally P.O. (SPM, Kulasekharapuram P.O.)
44. P. Unnikrishnan Nair, Krishna Vilasam,
Mavarakonam, Kalluvathukkal
(SPM, Thekkumbhagam P.O.)
45. T.Mathews Mathew, Thayyil Kizhakkedathil
Perumpuzha PO 691 504
(Postal Assistant, Kollam HO)
46. R. Renuka Devi, Sreevignesh, MCRA 103
Thirumullavaram P.O. (Postal Assistant, Kollam Civil Station).
47. C. Lilly, Layam, Gandhi Mukku, Kottarakara P.O
(Postal Assistant, Kollam HO.)
48. L. Anantharamalekshmi, Vasantham, Devi Nagar 342
Thirumullavaram P.O. 691012 (SPM, Thevally P.O.)
49. J. R. Padmaja Devi, Aramom, Shoba, Thirumullavaram P.O.
( Postal Assistant, Kollam Cutchery P.O.)
50. R. Sureshkumar, Suranya, Thazham North, Chathannoor P.O.
(Postal Assistant, Thangassery P.O.)
51. P. Sheeba, Rohini, Thottumkara, Mayyanad P.O
(SPM, Pullichira P.O.)
52. P.J. George Kutty, Parasseril House, Melkavu, Kottayam H.O.
Postal Assistant, Kottayam H.O.)
53. S. Alex, Junior Accountant, Velliavilai (Aruganthottu Vilai)
Palappallam P.O. 629159, Kanyakumari District
(Office of the Director of Postal Accounts, Trivandrum).
54. A. Meetheen Pillay, 9/1, Sabnam, Near Govt. Higher
Secondary School, Thiruvithamcode P.O.
(Senior Accountant, Office of the DAP, Trivandrum).
55. S. Lakshmi, TC 20/2876, Hari Saras, SRA 193,
Karamana P.O. 695002
(Sub Postmaster, Tv Govt. Press P.O
Trivandrum 695001) ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Laila Sunil)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 001
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram.
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Thiruvananthapuram Division
Thiruvananthapuram.
5. The Superintendent of Post Offices
Kollam Division, Kollam
6. The Superintendent of Post Offices
Pathanamthitta Division, Pathanamthitta
7. The Superintendent of Post Offices
Kolttayam Division, Kottayam
8. The Director (Staff)
Department of Posts
Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi - 110 001 ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, ACGSC)
3. O.A. NO. 988 OF 2011
1. D. Sheela
Jaya Bhavan, Agarathuvila, Kadavattaraam
Neyyattinkara 695121 (Accountant, MACP II, HRO RMS,
Trivandrum Division, Trivandrum 695001).
2. T.S. Jayalekshmi
5-A, Sun Elegance, Kesavan Nair Road, Poojapura P.O.,
Thiruvananthapuram 695012.
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
3. V.S. Kumari Sudha
Ashtamy, College Road, Dhanuvachapuram 695503
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
4. P. Padmavathy, TC 58/963,
Chithirai, Padassery Lane, Attukal, Manacaud P.O
Thiruvananthapuram - 695009
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division,
Trivandrum 695001).
5. S. Jalajambika , Shanmugha Vilasam
Theviyode, Vithura P.O. 695551
(OA, MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
6. L. Usha Devi, TC4/935,
Sree Chitira Nagar, Kurisuvilakathu Veedu,
Kowdiar P.O., Thiruvananthapuram 695003
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division,
Trivandrum 695001).
7. L. Seethalekshmi Amma, Anjanam, TC-6/281 (23)
Nethaji Road, Prasanthi Gardens, Vattiyurkavu P.O.,
Thiruvananthapuram 695013
(OA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
8. S. Vijayakumari
Thulaseedharan, V.T. Bhavan, Dhanuvachapuram P.O. 695503
(SA MACP II, HRO RMS, Trivandrum Division
Trivandrum 695001).
9. M. Spain Rose, Thoufeek, House No. 15,
Vikhas Nagar, Ambalathara, Poonthura P.O
Thiruvananthapuram 695026
(Accountant MACP II, BPC, Trivandrum 695023).
10. V. Vanajakumari,
Devika, TC 22/583 (3) Konchira Vila, Manacaud P.O
Thiruvananthapuram 695009
(SA MACP II, BPC, Trivandrum 695023). ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Laila Sunil)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi.
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 001
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram.
4. The Senior Superintendent, R.M.S.
Thiruvananthapuram Division,
Thiruvananthapuram 695036.
5. The Director (Staff),
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi 110001. ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mrs.Deepthi Mary Varghese, ACGSC)
4. O.A. NO. 31 OF 2012
1. Jose Mathew
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Chennathu House, Chengalam P.O.
Kottayam District- 686 585
2 . P.R Sureshkumar,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Pullatu, S H Mount P.O., Kottayam_ 686 006
3. K.P.Sulochana Devi,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at C-1I1-3, P & T Quarters, I
Muttambalam, Kottayam-4
4. V.Anjanakumari,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Sreevilasam, Kumaranalloor P.O
Kottayam-686 016
5. R Sobhakumari, D
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Kolamkuzhiyil, Anicad East P.O., Kottayam
6. Kuruvilla Varghese,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Vattamala (H), Velloor P.O, Pampady, Kottayam
7. P.K.Geetha Devi,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kottayam
Residing at Karipal House, Vadavathoor, Kottayam
8. K.K.Ramani,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kollam,
Residing at Krishnakripa, FFRA-85, Mundakkal East, KolIam-1
9. G.Hariprakash,
Sorting Assistant MACP II
Sub Record Office, RMS TV Division, Kollam
Residing at Palvila Puthenveedu, Near BHS, Attingal.
10. V.Rajkumar,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Kollam,
Residing at Muruga Bhavan, Surianalle P.O.
Munnar(via), Idukki District 685 618
11. V.P. Sujeendra Babu
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Thiruvalla,
Residing at Valavunkal House, Kunthrickal P.O.
Thalavady, Thiruvalla, Alappuzha -689 572
12. Roy T Eapen,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office
RMS TV Division, Thiruvalla,
Residing at Thayyil house, Velliara P.O.,
Ayroor North, Pathanamthitta- 689 612
13. K.Ponraj,
` Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Thiruvalla,
Residing at Rajbhavan, Melady, Marayur P.O
Idukki District - 685 620
14. P.Gireesh Kumar,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Alappuzha,
Residing at Krishnapuri, North Aryad,
Mannancherry P.O., Alappuzha- 688538
15. P.J.Aleykutty,
TBOP Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office
RMS TV Division, Thiruvalla, residing at CA II,
P& T Quarters, Alappuzha
16. M.V.Jayasree,
Sorting Assistant MACP II, Sub Record Office,
RMS TV Division, Alappuzha,
Residing at Ambady, Varanad P.O., Cherthala,
Alappuzha. ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Rekha Vasudevan)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi.
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram - 695 001
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram.
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
R.M.S. T.V Division,
Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala
5. The Director (Staff),
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi 110001. ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.Millu Dandapani, ACGSC (R1-4)
5. O.A. NO. 1150 OF 2012
1. M. J. Leela,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Thadavanal House,
Arakulam P.O., Idukki- 685 591
2. P.D.Philip,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division
residing at Pazhoor House, Puthenchira,
Muthalakodam P.O., Idukki-685 505
3. T.K.Rajeev,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division
residing at Thekkemoozhickal, Kurumpalamattom
Karimannoor P.O., Idukki-685 581
4. I. Indira,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Narayana Mangalam, Muvattupuzha- 686 661
5. Baby Joseph
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office, Railway Mail Service,
Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Palekudiyil, Ayavana P.O., Idukki- 686 668
6 Jessy Augustine
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division
Residing at Padinjarekara, Puthepura, Karimpana P.O.,
Koothattukulam 686662
7. P. Letchmanan,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office, Railway Mail Service,
Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Augraham House,
Marayur P.O., Idukki-686 520
8. M.B.Karunakaran,
Sorting Assistant, Sub Record Office, Railway Mail Service,
Ernakulam Division,
Residing at Madapparayil House,
Muvattupuzha P.O.- 686 661 ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Rekha Vasudevan)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi- 110 001
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala - 695 033
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram., Kerala - 695 033
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Railway Mail Service, Ernakulam Division,
Ernakulam - 682 011
5. The Director (Staff),
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi 110001. ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.Millu Dandapani, ACGSC )
6. O.A. NO. 1151 OF 2012
1 R. Girija,
Office Assistant, Divisional Office,
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Puramadathil House, Edamuruku,
Cheenikuzhi P.O., Udumbanoor - 685595
2. B. Vijayakumar,
Office Assistant, Divisional Office,
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Souparnika, Chittoor, Puthuperiyaram P.O.,
Vengallur- 685608
3. O. R. Girija,
Postal Assistant, Thodupuzha Head Office
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Thekkanathu House,
Thodupuzha East P.O., Kanjiramattom,
Idukki 685 585
4. Santhy Jose,
Postal Assistant, Thodupuzha East
Department of Post, Idukki Division
Residing at Elavunkal House, Thodupuzha East P.O.
Idukki 685 585
5. M.S.Lathika Devi
Postal Assistant, Thodupuzha Head Office
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Mangalamundakal
Thodupuzha East, Idukki 685 585.
6 Anitha T.R.
Postal Assistant, Karimanur,
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Kunnumpurath, Thodupuzha, Idukki
7. N. Harikumar,
Postal Assistant, Muthalakodam Sub Office,
Thodupuzha, Department of Post,
Idukki Division,
Residing at Puthenveedu, Kolani P.O
Thodupuzha, Idukki
8 Nixon John,
Sub Postmaster, Thodupuzha East,
Department of Post, Idukki Division,
Residing at Palammattam House,
Chittoor, Puthupariyaram P.O
Vengalloor, Idukki- 685 608 ... Applicants
(By Advocate Ms.Rekha Vasudevan)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications
New Delhi- 110 001
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Circle, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala - 695 033
3. The Director of Postal Services (HQ)
Office of the Chief Post Master General, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram., Kerala - 695 033
4. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Idukki Division, Thodupuzha, Kerala - 685 584
5. The Director (Staff),
Department of Posts, Ministry of Communications & IT
New Delhi 110001. ... Respondents
(By Advocate Ms.Deepthi Mary Varghese, ACGSC)
7. O.A. NO. 1014 OF 2010
P.Premalatha
Sub Postmaster, Angamali South
Ernakulam District
Residing at Latha Vilas House
Manickamangalam P.O
Kalady - 683 574 ... Applicant
(By Advocate Mr.TCG Swamy)
versus
1. Union of India represented by Secretary
to Government of India
Ministry of Communications & IT
(Department of Posts), Dak Bhavan
New Delhi- 110 116
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Kerala Postal Circle, Thiruvananthapuram
3. The Post Master General
Central Region, Kochi
4. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,
Aluva Postal Division, Aluva
Ernakulam District ... Respondents
(By Advocate Mr.Sunil Jacob Jose, SCGSC)
These applications having been heard on 22.08.2013, the Tribunal on
01.10.2013 delivered the following order:
O R D E R
HON'BLE Dr.K.B.S.RAJAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
As the issue involved in the above cases is one and the same, the
same are dealt with in this common order. However, as a leading case,
facts as well as reference as contained in OA No. 79 of 2011 have been
taken for the purpose of discussion.
2. Counting of service rendered by the applicants under the Reserve
Trained Pool system for the purpose of seniority, benefits relating to financial
upgradations and other consequential benefits is the issue involved in these
cases.
3. Sometimes in the eighties, the respondents had introduced a
system called Reserve Trained Pool (RTP for short) vide order dated 30-10-
1980, at Annexure A-1. The salient feature of this system includes that
when posts of Postal Assistants and Sorting Assistants were filled in each
recruitment unit, while drawing a list of selected candidates equivalent to the
number of vacancies to be filled up, an additional list upto 50% of the
vacancies would be prepared and these would also be imparted training and
categorized as trained reserve candidates and kept in reserve, to meet the
future regular and current emergent needs of manpower in the Post and
RMS Offices. In other words, these RTP candidates could be compared to
wait-listed candidates with an assurance of regularization against future
vacancies.
4. Such a list was prepared in which all the applicants in the above
O.As figured and their services were utilized for emergent needs. In view of
the imposition of ban on direct recruitment from 1984 to 1990, these RTP
were not regularized against any of the vacancies that arose during the
above period. It was only in 1990 that such vacancies were filled up by
absorption of the aforesaid RTP candidates.
5. A number of Original Applications were filed by the RTP
candidates including some of the applicants in these O.As, during 1990 and
1991 praying for a declaration that the applicants were entitled to get the
benefit of their services commencing from the date of their initial
engagement as RTP PAs for the purpose of annual increment, bonus, length
of service for the purpose of departmental examination and for seniority and
other purposes and for a direction to the respondents to afford the applicants
the consequential benefits arising from such declaration. These O.As, with
814 of 90 as the main case were decided vide Annexure A-6 order dated
21-04-1992 whereby the Tribunal directed the respondents to afford such of
the RTP candidates who had rendered continuous service of over one year
at 8 hours a day, temporary status and count half such service as qualifying
service for pension and all the benefits available to casual mazdoors having
been granted temporary status would also percolate upon such RTP
candidates from the date of their temporary status. This order was followed
in subsequent applications as well, vide orders at Annexures A-9 and A-10.
The decision in OA No. 814 of 1990 was under challenge before the Apex
Court and the same was then pending.
6. Four individuals similarly circumscribed as the applicants in these
O.As, filed a case before the Tribunal and the Tribunal, after referring the
matter to the Industrial Tribunal for fact finding purposes, held that such
persons be granted seniority with reference to the initial date of their
appointment. Annexure A-11 order dated 8th February, 1996 refers. The
order was implemented, whereby these individuals were accordingly granted
seniority from the date of their initial appointment.
7. The challenge against decision in OA No. 814 of 1990 and
connected cases (vide Annexure A-6) which was challenged by the
respondents herein before the Apex Court, was decided and the Apex Court
vide judgment reported in Union of India vs K.N. Sivadas (1997) 7 SCC 30
held that there is no comparison between the RTP and casual labourers as
these two are under two different schemes. The Apex court has thus held in
that judgment as under:-
"The position of these two categories of employees is very
different as we have already set out. The Tribunal has also
erred in assuming that casual labourers are getting these
benefits during the period for which the RTPs are claiming
these benefits. RTPs have already obtained the benefit of
absorption in regular service because of their own scheme.
They, therefore, cannot, on the one hand, avail of their own
special scheme and at the same time, claim additional
benefits on the basis of what has been given to the casual
labourers. This is unwarranted, especially as the period for
which they claim these benefits is the period during which
such benefits were not available to casual labourers."
8. OA 1178 of 1996 was filed by a number of such RTP candidates,
seeking the benefit of regularization from retrospective effect but the same
was rejected by the Tribunal and the matter was taken up with the High
Court, which too, after detailed discussion rejected the writ petition No.
21249 of 2000 vide Annexure A-12.
9. Well before the above order was passed, the Jabalpur Bench of
the Tribunal dealt with identical case and passed Annexure A-7 order dated
16th December, 1986 whereby the following directions were given:-
"10. Under the circumstances, to end the unreasonable and
unjust classification that had been introduced as the result of
dual policy of the Government as reflected in the issue of the
circular (Annexure R1) and the stopping of further
recruitment and absorption to the cadre of posts of Postal
Assistants, as affirmed in para 8 of the Respondent's return
dated 24.6.1985, we direct that:-
a. Government shall review their policy to stop
recruitment/absorption of persons against regular
Postal Assistants.
b. No persons shall be inducted from other
Departments like Railway Mail Service and
Telecommunication Department to man posts of
Postal assistants until the petitioners are absorbed
against regular posts.
c. No fresh persons be taken and recruited against
the R.T.P. (Reserve Trained Pool) until the
Government reviews their policy as under (a)
above. The operation of the circular dated
31.10.1980 (Annexure R1) in regard to recruitment
of fresh persons to R.T.P. other than petitioners is
struck down in exercise of this Tribunal's writ
jurisdiction.
d. The absorption of the petitioners against regular
posts will be so phased on the basis of para 2 of
circular dated 30.10.1980, as if no restriction had
been imposed on their regular
recruitment/absorption earlier and shall be
completed within a reasonable period from the date
of this order, if necessary by creating
supernumerary posts, and subject to screening of
the unfit by a specially constituted screening
committee to examine their record and
performance. The Screening Committee shall also
keep in view their seniority in the R.T.P.
11. x x x x
12. Under the circumstances, for reasons stated in the
preceding paragraph, we find the provisions of the circular
dated 30.10.1980 (Annexure R1) in so far they relate to
payment of hourly rates of wages to employees in the R.T.P.
discriminatory and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the
Constitution and are struck down. We direct respondents that
the R.T.P. Employees performing the same duties as Postal
Assistants shall be paid the same salary and emoluments per
mensem as are being received by Postal Assistants with effect
from the date of their appointment. As regards other conditions
of service and facilities demanded by the petitioners this is
subject to their regular absorption as directed in para 10."
10. The above decision of Jabalpur Bench was challenged before the
Apex Court in SLP (C) No. 11313 of 1997 which was however, dismissed.
This decision was followed in a subsequent decision by the Bombay Bench
in OA No. 719 of 1996 and 8 other connected cases, vide order dated 31st
August, 2010 at Annexure A-30.
11. Similarly, the Madras Bench of the Tribunal had also dealt with
identical issue and by its order dated 25-02-1988, direction was given for
absorption of the RTP candidates against regular vacancies in the order of
merit in the Reserved Trained Pool from the date next regular vacancies in
their turn materialized. Annexure A-8 refers.
12. When a scheme called Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP for
short) was introduced in 1983, the same provided for automatic promotion
on completion of 16 years of service as Postal Assistant or Sorting Assistant.
The stipulation of 16 years of service was interpreted by the respondents as
16 years of regular service and a case was filed by one Mathivanan who was
an RTP candidate, selected for the Army Postal Service and his appointment
prior to his entry in the Army Postal Service was purely ad hoc. The matter
reached upto the Apex court and the Apex Court had held that since the
term 'regular' was not figuring with the term "sixteen years of service"
notwithstanding the fact there was no regular service but the individual
completed 16 years of service, he was granted the benefit of the TBOP
Scheme. Judgment of the Apex Court - Union of India vs M. Mathivanan
(2006) 6 SCC 57 refers. This decision was uniformly applied to all similarly
situated till 31-08-2008 after which the TBOP Scheme was replaced by
MACP Scheme, vide Annexure A-15.
13. The applicant in OA No. 79 of 2011 had moved two
representations, vide Annexure A-13 and A-17, inviting the attention of the
respondents to the decision vide Annexure A-11 which was implemented by
the respondents and sought similar relief. The two representations have not
been responded to by the respondents.
14. The respondent No. 1 had, vide Annexure A-29 passed an order,
referring to various decisions, to the effect that while TBOP scheme did not
specifically refer to regular service, the subsequent MACP scheme having
specifically utilized the term "regular service", the services rendered prior to
regularization of the RTP candidates be not reckoned while considering the
eligibility for grant of MACP.
15. The above order of the respondents is under challenge and the
applicants in all these O.As have claimed almost identical reliefs. The
reliefs sought in the main OA 79/11 are reproduced hereunder:-
(a) Declare that the applicant is entitled to be
accommodated against the regular vacancy which arose in
the year 1984, i.e. the next recruiting year subsequent to
her selection as Short Duty Postal Assistant in 1983, as
directed by the Jabalpur Bench of this Hon'ble Tribunal in
Annexure A-7 final order and to direct the respondents to
grant her regular absorption with effect from the date if the
regular vacancy which arose in the year 1984, .e the next
recruiting year subsequent to her selection as Short Duty
Postal Assistant in 1983 and to refix her seniority and other
consequential service benefits accordingly.
(b) Direct the respondents to count her service
rendered as Reserve Trained Pool for the purpose of
granting the financial upgradation under the Time Bound
One Promotion Scheme and the Modified Assured Career
Progression Scheme.
(c) Quash Annexures A-29 letter dated 12.04.2012
issued by the Director (Staff), Ministry of Communications &
IT.
16. Respondents have contested the O.A. They have highlighted the
aspect of limitation on the one hand and laid stress that the decision in
Mathivanan would apply to those who were similarly situated as the said
Mathivanan (APS).
17. Counsel for the applicants argued that the respondents had
eclipsed the existence of the decision by the Jabalpur Bench when the case
of Sivadas was considered by the Tribunal as well as the Apex Court. The
decision in Sivadas in fact only compared the status of the RTP and casual
labourers with temporary status. The benefit of service prior to regularization
had been granted for the purpose of TBOP as per the information gathered
under RTI. The applicants are entitled to the reliefs sought for, on the
strength of Annexure A-7 order of the Jabalpur Bench as well as Annexure
A-11 order of this Bench. Restricting the benefit of Annexure A-11 order to
the applicants therein alone is illegal as the decision in that case has to be
taken as applicable for all similarly situated.
18. Counsel for the applicant in OA No. 1014 of 2010 submitted that the
case of the applicant in that OA is slightly different from the other cases in
that, in that case, the applicant filed OA No. 323 of 11 and the same was
disposed of by order dated 13 Feb. 2012 . The direction given to the
respondent in that order that the respondents would consider the case of the
applicant for financial upgradation under MACP duly taking into account the
services rendered as RTP candidate without the benefit of seniority and
would take appropriate decision and intimate the decision within a time of six
months. The respondents had accordingly, considered but the rejected the
case of the applicant by order dated 28-05-2012 stating that vide the
Directorate Instructions dated 12-04-2012 and in view of the judgment in the
case of K.N. Sivadas and provisions contained in the MACP scheme it was
concluded that the services rendered under RTP scheme by the personnel
prior to their regular appointment of PA/SA cannot be counted for promotion,
seniority and grant of MACP. Thus, the case of the applicant was rejected.
The counsel submitted that the direction as per A-6 order dated 13-02-2012
was to the first respondent viz., the Secretary, Ministry of Communications,
Dept of Posts, whereas the rejection letter came from the Chief Postmaster
General. The rejection order is without application of mind as the
respondents had failed to take into account the factum of having conceded
before the Tribunal in OA No. 323 of 2011.
19. Counsel for the respondents maintained the same contention of
limitation as well as non permissibility of counting of the services prior to
regularization in respect of grant of MACP.
20. Arguments were heard and documents perused. Sivadas only
distinguished the cases covered by RTP scheme on the one hand and
Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status) Scheme on the other and
held that the former, who is better placed, cannot claim any benefit available
to the latter in addition to the ones available under the RTP Scheme. The
Apex Court in that case did not examine the scope or extent of the benefits
available to the RTP, save stating that the benefits available under that
scheme alone would have to be afforded to RTP and not in addition thereto
the benefits available to the temporary status casual labourers. Mathivanan
held that for grant of TBOP regular service need not be insisted and thus
services rendered in the APS could be reckoned for the purpose of working
out the eligibility of grant of TBOP. In fact, order dated 21st July, 2010 vide
Annexure A-15 was passed in pursuance of the decision of the Apex Court
in Mathivanan. The contention of the respondents is that the said decision
would apply to cases where an RTP candidate, granted ad hoc status prior
to deputation to APS was later sent to APS and would not apply to those
who remained as RTP candidates throughout till their regularization in 1990.
21. The claim of the applicants in these O.As is not related to any
such benefits as in the case of Sivadas. At the same time, the fact remains
that there is an observation by the Apex Court about the superior status of
the RTPs compared to that of casual labourers with temporary status. This
is evident from the observation of the High Court in para 3 of Annexure A-12,
wherein it has been observed, "The apex Court further held that R.T.Ps are
better placed...". This observation cannot be lost sight of.
22. Mathivanan dealt with the entitlement of ad hoc services to be
reckoned for TBOP, which scheme did not stipulate 16 years of 'regular'
service but only insisted on 16 years of service in the grade. The ratio in
that decision is that services rendered irrespective of whether the same were
regular or otherwise would count.
23. Admittedly, from 1984 there had been a ban on direct recruitment on
account of which alone, it was not possible for the respondents to regularize
the services of a number of RTPs inducted in early 1980s. It is not the case
of the respondents that there arose no vacancies during the period of ban.
But for the clamping of the ban, many of the RTPs would have been
absorbed against regular vacancies in their turn. In fact, in another decision
in OA No. 323 of 2012 decided on 13trh February, 2012 (filed by the
applicant in OA No. 1014 of 2010), this Bench of the Tribunal had
considered an identical case and recorded vide para 16 thereof, "In view of
this fact, the respondents have fairly conceded that the issue of counting the
services of RTP candidate for financial upgrdation under MACP on purely
personal basis without any benefit of seniority is under active consideration
of the Respondents." Of course, the aforesaid consideration culminated in
the impugned order dated 12th April, 2012 vide Annexure A-29. Therein, the
decision was that there is a striking difference in respect of qualifying service
under TBOP and MACP Scheme, in that for the former, the requirement was
only 16 years of service, while in the latter the requirement is 'regular
service.' And in respect of TBOP, from the information received under RTI
by the applicants, some cases of RTP candidates were favourably
considered for grant of TBOP and some were under consideration etc., vide
Annexures A-21 to A-28. The decision in Mathivanan to reckon the service
prior to regular service was not on the specific reason that the individual
joined APS to confine the benefits to those who had joined APS. It only
considered whether service prior to regularization could be reckoned or not.
From this point of view, there cannot be an intelligible differentia between
those of the RTPs who had joined APS and who had not to deny the
benefits of the decision in Mathivanan to the applicants. All the RTP
candidates should be considered at par.
24. As regards challenge to order dated 28-5-2012 in OA NO. 1014 of
2010, the decision conveyed to the applicant was in the wake of
communication from the Directorate dated 12-04-2012 (Annexure A-29 in the
other OA No. 79 of 2011). As such, the same cannot be said to be the
decision of the Chief PMG. Further, the order dated 13-02-2012 referred to
the admission of the respondents only to the extent that the issue of counting
of service as RTP candidate for financial upgradation on purely personal
basis was only 'under consideration' of the respondents. It does not seem to
be an assurance to give any financial benefits under thereof, when the
conditions attached to the MACP scheme does not get fulfilled.
25. In so far as the challenge to Annexure A29 order dated 12th April,
2012 is concerned, the challenge is not legally sustainable. In its decision in
the case of M.Mathivanan, the Apex Court has distinguished regular service
and service simplicitor. In so far as TBOP is concerned, the requirement was
not regular service and accordingly those who had put in 16 years of service
(need not one of regular) were also to be covered by the TBOP Scheme.
However, a specific stipulation of regular service has been provided for in
respect of MACP which substituted TBOP Scheme. As such, Para 7 of the
said order at Annexure A29 is legally sustainable. Thus the entire case could
be converged to the following extent:-
(a) In so far as reckoning of service for the purpose of
grant of TBOP benefits there is no difference between a
RTP candidate whose services were regularized later on
and an RTP candidate who was sent to APS and was
reverted after his deputation period, The decision of the
Apex Court in M.Mathivanan is, therefore, applicable to all
those RTPs irrespective of whether they were sent to APS
or not.
(b) In so far as MACP is concerned, the period of service
shall be reckoned only from the date of regular service
disregarding the services rendered prior to regularization.
(d) For grant of 2nd financial up-gradation under the
MACP Scheme, it shall be only the regular service that has
to be counted and not 10 years after the grant of TBOP
benefits, since TBOP benefits were granted without taking
into account the regular service.
(e) There is no question of regularization from the date of
initial appointment or from the date vacancy arose, much
less seniority on the basis of such regularization as the
same had been rejected by the High Court vide judgment at
Annexure A-12 already referred to.
26. In view of the above, the only benefit that could be available to the
applicants is that in so far as grant of TBOP is concerned, if the respondents
have taken into account only the regular service and not the service before
regularization they should take into account such service as well. Since
vacancies of 1984 onwards could not be filled up due to ban on recruitment
and the applicants were serving as RTPs during these years, the services
rendered by them from 1984 to 1990 or thereafter till the date of
regularization should be considered as service that could be reckoned for
working out the eligibility for benefits of TBOP Scheme.
27. In view of the above, all these Original Applications are disposed of
with direction to the respondents as under:-
(a) Respondents shall work out the vacancies that arose
from 1984 onwards, which could not be filled up on on
account of the ban on recruitment.
(b) RTP candidates on the basis of their year of
recruitment, coupled with the order of merit, shall be
accommodated notionally against such vacancies that
were lying unfilled from 1984 onwards.
(c) It is from the date on which these applicants could be
deemed to have been placed against such vacancies that
the period of 16 years of service for grant of TBOP benefits
shall be worked out.
(d) On completion of 16 years of such service, they
would be deemed to have been granted TBOP benefits
and the pay in the higher scale shall be fixed.
(e) Arrears shall be worked out in respect of these
cases and the same shall be payable to the applicants
concerned.
(f) In so far as MACP is concerned, the period of 20
years for 2nd MACP shall be reckoned only from the date of
regular appointment and those who are entitled to 2nd
MACP financial benefits accordingly shall be afforded the
same, if not already done.
28. The above order shall be complied with, within a period of six
months from the date of communication of this order. No order as to costs.
Dated, the 1st October, 2013.
K.GEORGE JOSEPH Dr.K.B.S.RAJAN
ADMINISTARTIOVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
vs
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Service rendered under RTP Scheme prior to regular appointment as P A / S A can not be counted for promotion, seniority and grant of MACP.
COUNTING
OF SERVICE RENDERED BY RESERVE TRAINED POOL (RTP) PERSONNEL PRIOR TO
THEIR REGULAR APPOINTMENT AS POSTAL ASSISTANTS (PAs)/SORTING ASSISTANTS
(SAs)-REGARDING.
D.G. Posts No. 44-1/2011-SPB.II dated 12 April, 2012.
I
am directed refer to Directorate’s letter of even number dated
13.1.2011 on the above subject and to say that the issue of counting of
service rendered by Reserve Trained Pool(RTP) personnel prior to their
regular appointment as Postal Assistants(PAs)/Sorting Assistants (SAs)
for promotion, seniority and grant of MACP was under consideration of
the Directorate.
2.
The RTP Scheme was introduced in the year 1980 as per which a panel of
such persons was retained who could not be covered under the number of
vacancies declared for regular appointment as PA/SA. When required they
were detailed on duty on wages to be paid on hourly basis to meet the
short time needs and current needs. The said RTP personnel were given
priority for absorption against vacancies, which occurred subsequently.
In the year 1983 the RTP personnel were given an option to opt for
servicing Army Postal Services (APS).Such persons who opted so were
appointed as PA/SA on ad-hoc basis and deputed to APS. The said RTP
candidates deputed to APS were eligible to get the benefit of regular
appointment in the Civil Post. The RTP scheme was abolished w.e.f.
4.3.1986.
3.
While furnishing the information asked for from the Circles, the Orissa
Circle has brought to the notice of the Directorate that three OAs
filed by three officials in the Cuttack Bench of Hon`ble CAT seeking
regularization of the services rendered under RTP scheme were dismissed
on 10.4.2003 for the reason that the issue raised has already been
decided by the Apex Court on 1.8.1997 in the case of UOI and another Vs
K. Sivados and others in C.A. No. 80-123 of 1996
4. It is observed that Apex Court
in their judgment dated 01.08.1997 has discussed the case in detail and
has rejected the case for grant of Productivity Linked Bonus to RTP
personnel. As regards grant of benefit of counting their services as RTP
personnel for the purpose of their eligibility to appear for the
departmental examination the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the same judgment
has observed that the relevant rule provides that the candidate “ must
have put in at least five years continuous satisfactory service in one
or more eligible cadres” and hence pronounced that any service rendered
by RTP personnel prior to their regular appointment in the cadre cannot
count for the purpose of the said rule because it can not be considered
as service in any eligible cadre. Thus, the Apex Court
has held that Tribunal was wrong in granting to RTP personnel the
benefit of service rendered by them prior to their regular appointment,
for the purpose of their eligibility to appear for the departmental
promotion examination.
5.
In another case Hon`ble Supreme Court in C.A. No. 5739 of 2005 in the
case of UOI Vs Shri Mathivanan vide their judgment dated 9.6.2006 has
held that ad-hoc service rendered in APS by RTP personnel should be
counted for the purpose of grant of financial upgradation under TBOP
scheme. This was mainly due to the fact that the said Scheme did not
mention the requirement of ‘regular service’ in para 1 of the Scheme for
being eligible for grant of financial upgradation under TBOP scheme .In
fact, the Hon1ble Supreme Court observed that it was not a case where
promotion to the higher post is to be made only on the basis of
seniority. Keeping in view the Apex Court’s decision in M. Mathivanan’s
case and the fact the TBOP is not to be granted on the basis of
seniority, it was decided to extend the benefit of the Apex Court’s
order to similarly placed serving officials vide Directorate’s letter
No. 93-25/2003-SPB.II dated 26.7.2010.
6.
As per MACP scheme, the officials are eligible for grant of three
financial upgradations on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service
respectively. For the purpose, it has been laid down that ‘regular
service’ for the purpose of the MACPs shall commence from the date of
joining of a post in direct entry grade on a regular basis either on
direct recruitment basis or on absorption /re-employment basis. It has
been categorically stated that the service rendered on ad-hoc/contract
basis before regular appointment on pre-appointment training shall not
be taken into reckoning.
7.
In view of the judgment dated 01.08.1997 delivered in C.A. 80-123 1996
in the case of UOI & another Vs K.N.Sivados and others and
provisions contained in MACP scheme, it has been decided by the
Competent Authority that the service rendered under RTP scheme by the
personnel prior to their regular appointment as PA/SA can not be counted
for promotion , seniority and grant of MACP.
8.
The above decision may be taken into consideration while defending the
court case. The representations received on the subject may also be
dealt with accordingly.
Sd/-
(Raj Kumar)
Director (Staff)
Friday, August 26, 2011
RTP Employees are entitle to be paid the same salary and emoluments per mensem as are being reserved by the PA w.e.f the date of their appointment
Employees recruited as Postal Assistant in Reserve Trainee Pool Scheme(RTPS) of Postal Department are entitled to be paid the same salary and emoluments per mensem as are being reserved by the Postal Assistant wef the date of their appointment other benefits are subject to their regular absorption in the Postal Department.
Facts: There are 9 Applicants who are Postal Assistant in the Reserve Trainee Pool of Postal Department earlier, they filled an O.A. which was disposed by the Tribunal with a direction to the Respondents to grant the Applicants benefit of regularization, seniority, pay scale, etc. from the initial date they were appointed as P.A. under the reserve Trainee Pool Scheme. That order was passed on the basis of earlier order of Jabalpur Bench of the Tribunal in O.A. NO.82 of 1986,dated 16-12-1986.That order was challenged in High Court which remitted the case back to Tribunal to give separate reasons for regularization ,seniority and salary from the date of their appointment under the Pool Scheme. In view of the above, the earlier order of the Tribunal was reconsidered in the review. But the Applicants were not present. Respondents were heard.
All the nine applicants were appointed as P.A. under the RTP Scheme in 1980.That scheme was withdrawn in 1986. But before that some RTP persons approached the Jabalpur Bench of the Tribunal by the filing T.A. No. 82 of 1986 for the relief which as allowed. That TA was disposed of by Jabalpur Bench. The important point to be noted in the order at para.13 concisely are; (i) To review the policy to stop recruitment/ absorption of person against regular Postal Assistant(ii) None are inducted as P.A. from other wing of Postal Department till the petitioners therein are absorbed against regular posts(iii) No fresh appointment of RTP are made till the policy of recruitment is reserved (iv) The cases of the applicants are considered for absorption on the basis of Circular, dated 30.10.1980 by forming a Screening Committee. Further it was held to keep parity of the RTPs with Postal Assistant in regular posts in regards to salary, etc. The Provision of Circular, dated 30.10.1980 in so far it relates to payment of hourly rates of wages to employees in RTP is discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution. RTP are to be paid the same salary and allowances as was given to Postal Assistants. This order is subject to regular absorption of those RTPs.
The above orders when challenged it was dismissed by Supreme Court also.
The main oreder in T.A. NO.82 of 1986 filed in Jabalpur Bench is the direction of the respondents to treat the Applicants(RTPs) as regular Postal Assistant form the date of their appointment as RTP with all consequential benefits of seniority, pay fixation. They are allowed monetary benefits from the date of filing this O.A.
The Tribunal reconsidered their earlier orders. The Jabalpur Bench in T.A. No.82 of 1986 granted salary and emoluments to be paid to RTPs same as regular P.A. from the date of their appointment. But the Bombay Bench in respect of 9 Applicants herein to treat them as P.A. from the date of their appointment under RTP Scheme with all consequential benefits including seniority and pay fixation. To this extent there is a contradiction in the order of the Bombay Bench.
The Appointment of RTPs herein appointed long back is not disputed. Evidently all the Applicants herein were granted all the consequential benefits from the date of absorption, admitting that the Applicants herein are placed similar to Applicants in O.A. No.82 of 1986.With the above details, the reconsideration of these case as ordered by the High Court of Bombay in its Order, dated 11-06-2010, these OAs are allowed by directing the Respondents to extend the present nine Applicants same relief as granted to the Applicant in T.A. No.82 of 1986 decided by Jaballpur Bench on 16-12-1986 and upheld by Supreme Court by Order, dated 11-05-1988 by dismissing the SLP No. 11313 of 1987 preferred by Union of India against the order of Jabalpur Bench of Tribunal.
Thus all nine OAs are partly allowed in the terms of the above direction.
Above judgement printed in Swamys news August 2011
STANDARD OPERATING & ACCOUNTING PROCEDURE FOR PRINT TO POST SERVICE
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR PRINTING BOOKING TRANSMISSION & DELIVERY OF LETTERS CARRYING UID NUMBER OF RESIDENTS
CLICK HERE FOR TO SEE THE DETAILS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)