The High Court quashed the Central Administrative Tribunal order granting O.P.S. benefits by following the Supreme Court in Gandiba Behera, holding no provision allows adding GDS service tenure to qualify for pension.
The writ petition is allowed; the impugned order dated 25.10.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal is set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.3936 OF 2021|(S-CAT)
BETWEEN
...PETITIONERS
(BY MS. SHUBHA S, CGSC)
AND
2
RESIDING AT DOOR NO.7, 5TH MAIN ROAD, K H M BLOCK, GANGANAGAR BENGALURU-560 032
2 . A BRIGETA ASHA W/O A BALRAJ AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, WORKING AS POSTMAN BENGALURU G P O
RESIDING AT NO.63, 'ANTO NIVAS', 12TH A CROSS, S R NAGAR BENGALURU-560 027
3 . A S CHANDRASHEKAR S/O SANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, WORKING AS POSTMAN BENGALURU GPO
RESIDING AT
NO.151/1, 2ND FLOOR 8TH CROSS, 3RD MAIN CHAMARAJPET BENGALURU-560 018.
…RESPONDENTS
(R1, R2 & R3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 25.10.2018 ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH, BENGALURU IN O.A.NO.170/00375/2017 AND ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA J ., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
3
ORDER
Smt. Shubha S., learned counsel for the petitioners.
None for the respondents inspite of service of notice.
The present petition is arising out of the order dated 25.10.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (C.A.T.) in Original Application
No.170/00375/2017 (K.Somashekar Rao & Others vs. Union of India and others) by which the C.A.T. has directed the petitioner/Union of India to take into account the services rendered by the respondents prior to their appointment as Group-D employee and to grant the benefit of Old Pension Scheme.
attention of this Court to the judgment delivered by the Apex Court on 08.11.2019 in Civil Appeal No.8497/2019 (arising out of SLP (C) No.13042/2014) between Union of
4
India & Ors., and Gandiba Behera and connected matters.
Her contention is that the issue is no longer res integra .
read as under:
“20. For the reasons we have already discussed, we are of the opinion that the judgments under appeal cannot be sustained. There is no provision under the law on the basis of which any period of the services rendered by the respondents in the capacity of GDS could be added to their regular tenure in the postal department for the purpose of fulfilling the period of qualifying service on the question of grant of pension.
5
recourse to Rule 88 ought not to be taken. The said Rules is not number specific, and if undue hardship is caused to a large number of employees, all of their cases ought to be considered. If in the cases of any of the respondents’ pension order has already been issued, the same shall not be disturbed, as has been directed in the cases of Union of India & Ors. V Registrar & Anr. (supra). We, accordingly allow these appeals and set aside the judgments under appeal, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) In the event the Central Government or the postal department has already issued any order for pension to any of the respondents, then such pension should not be disturbed. In issuing this direction, we are following the course which was directed to be adopted by this Court in the case of Union of India & Ors. v. Registrar & Anr. (supra).
(ii) In respect of the other respondents, who have not been issued
6
any order for pension, the concerned ministry may consider as to whether the minimum qualifying service Rule can be relaxed in their cases in terms of Rule 88 of the 1972 Rules.
that there is no provision under the law on the basis of which any period of services rendered by the respondents in the capacity of GDS could be added to their regular tenure in the postal department for the purpose of fulfilling the period of qualifying service on the question of grant of pension, meaning thereby, the services prior to their becoming regular Class IV employees of the postal
department cannot be taken into account.
7
The pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
CA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal directing grant of Old Pension Scheme benefits prior to regular appointment must be quashed in light of the Supreme Court judgment in
Whether the period of services rendered in capacity of GDS can be added to regular tenure for fulfilling qualifying service for pension.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Union of India & Ors. vs. Gandiba BeheraFollowed¶35
Civil Appeal No.8497/2019 (arising out of SLP (C) No.13042/2014) between Union of India & Ors., and Gandiba Behera
Union of India & Ors. v. Registrar & Anr.Followed¶45
Union of India & Ors. v. Registrar & Anr.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Union of India Represented by its Secretary Department of Post
Chief Postmaster General Karnataka Circle Bengaluru
Chief Post Master Bengaluru GPO
K Somashekar Rao
A Brigeta Asha
A S Chandrashekar
Satish Chandra Sharma
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
