Allowed

Union of India v. Thomas P.D.

Kerala HC18 Jun 2020OP (CAT)/110/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Postal employees claimed MACP benefits reckoned from appointment as Postal/Sorting Assistants through LDCE. The court held those appointments were promotions under the recruitment rules, counted service from regular entry, and accounted for earlier promotions and financial upgradations. All departmental petitions were allowed.

What did the court decide?

All departmental Original Petitions (CAT) challenging the Tribunal’s MACP orders were allowed.

Union of India Vs Thomas P.D. — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 28TH JYAISHTA, 1942

¶7

OP (CAT).No.23 OF 2018(Z)

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 1189/2012 DATED 12-11-2015 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶9

PETITIONERS:

¶10

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT.OF INDIA,DEPARTMENT OF POSTS,NEW DELHI-110001.

¶11

2 THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL KERALA POSTAL CIRCLE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES MAVELIKKARA DIVISION,MAVELIKKARA.

¶13

4 THE POSTMASTER GENERAL CENTRAL REGION,KOCHI-682020.

¶14

BY ADVS. ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL SRI.T.V.VINU, CGC

¶15

RESPONDENT:

¶16

S.SIVADASAN

¶17

AGED 60 YEARS,S/O.BHARATHAN,RETIRED SUB POSTMASTER,CHINGOLI,RESIDING AT SHARADAMADAM,MANGALAM.P.O,THRIKKUNNAPUZHA,ALAPUZHA690515.

¶18

R1 BY ADV. M.R.HARIRAJ

¶19

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-06-2020, ALONG WITH OP (CAT).44/2017(Z), OP (CAT).341/2017(Z), OP (CAT).110/2018(Z), OP (CAT).315/2019, OP (CAT).328/2019, THE COURT ON 18-06-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018

¶21

and con.cases - 2 -

¶22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶23

PRESENT

¶24

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶25

¶26

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶27

THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 28TH JYAISHTA, 1942 OP (CAT).No.44 OF 2017

¶28

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 8/2014 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶29

PETITIONERS:

¶30

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POSTSNEW DELHI - 110 001.

¶31

2 THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL KERALA CIRCLE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033.

¶32

3 THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES THRISSUR DIVISION, THRISSUR - 680 001.

¶33

4 SR. ACCOUNTS OFFICEPOSTAL O/O. THE DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTS(POSTAL)KERALA CIRCLE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001.

¶34

BY ADV. SRI.T.V.VINU, CGC

¶35

RESPONDENT:

¶36

J.KRISHNAKUMARI AMMA

¶37

AGED 60 YEARS, W/O. M.P. PHILIP RETIRED POSTAL ASSISTANT,THRICHUR H.O, THRISSUR – 680001. RESIDING AT MAMPOOZHITHURA HOUSE, PERAMANGALAM P.O, THRISSUR - 680 041.

¶38

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-06-2020, ALONG WITH OP (CAT).341/2017(Z), OP (CAT).23/2018(Z), OP (CAT).110/2018(Z), OP (CAT).315/2019, OP (CAT).328/2019, THE COURT ON 18-06-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶39

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 3 -

¶40

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶41

PRESENT

¶42

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶43

¶44

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶45

THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 28TH JYAISHTA, 1942 OP (CAT).No.341 OF 2017

¶46

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 1190/2012 DATED 12-11-2015 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶47

PETITIONERS:

¶48

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS NEW DELHI-110001.

¶49

2 THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL KERALA POSTAL CIRCLE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶50

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES MAVELIKKARA DIVISION, MAVELIKKARA.

¶51

BY ADV. SRI.T.V.VINU, CGC

¶52

RESPONDENT:

¶53

MOHANAN NAIR V.AGED 52 YEARS 52 YEARS, S/O. VASUDEVAN NAIR,BUSINESS EXECUTIVE (POSTAL ASSISTANT ON DEPUTATION), MAVELIKKARA HEAD POST OFFICE, RESIDING AT VAISHNAVAM, KARIMULAKKAL, KOMALLOOR P.O., CHARUMMOOD, ALAPPUZHA-690505. R1 BY ADV. SMT.G.BINDU R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.A.KUMARAN R1 BY ADV. SMT.M.K.LEELA R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.RAJAGOPAL

¶54

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-062020, ALONG WITH OP (CAT).44/2017(Z), OP (CAT).23/2018(Z), OP (CAT).110/2018(Z), OP (CAT).315/2019, OP (CAT).328/2019, THE COURT ON 18-06-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶55

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018

¶56

and con.cases - 4 -

¶57

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶58

PRESENT

¶59

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶60

¶61

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 28TH JYAISHTA, 1942 OP (CAT).No.110 OF 2018

¶62

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 1197/2012 DATED 12.11.2015 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶63

PETITIONER/S:

¶64

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. OF INDIA,DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, NEW DELHI-110 001.

¶65

2 THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL KERALA POSTAL CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶66

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES MAVELIKARA DIVISION, MAVELIKARA.

¶67

BY ADV. SRI.T.V.VINU, CGC

¶68

RESPONDENTS:

¶69

1 THOMAS P.D. AGED 59 YEARS S/O.P.T.DANIEL (LATE),POSTAL ASSISTANT, HARIPAD POST OFFICE, RESIDING AT PALLITHEKKETHIL, SHALOM, CHEPPAD PO, ALAPUZHA -690 507.

¶70

2 M.B.APPUKUTTAN AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.KOCHU NANU, SUB POSTMASTER, CHEPPAD, RESIDING AT MANAMPADA HOUSE, THAMALLACKAL POST, HARIPAD-690 548.

¶71

R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.P.A.KUMARAN R1-2 BY ADV. SMT.L.LAKSHMI OMANAKUTTAN R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.K.RAJAGOPAL

¶72

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-06-2020, ALONG WITH OP (CAT).44/2017(Z), OP (CAT).341/2017(Z), OP (CAT).23/2018(Z), OP (CAT).315/2019, OP (CAT).328/2019, THE COURT ON 18-06-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶73

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 5 -

¶74

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶75

PRESENT

¶76

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶77

¶78

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶79

THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 28TH JYAISHTA, 1942 OP (CAT).No.315 OF 2019

¶80

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 817/2019 OF KERALA ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶81

PETITIONERS:

¶82

1 UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL POSTS, NEW DELHI-110001

¶83

2 THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL KERALA CIRCLE, TRIVANDRUM-695033

¶84

3 THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF RAILWAY MAIL SERVICES, TV DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695036

¶85

BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA

¶86

RESPONDENTS:

¶87

1 N. SATHIKUMAR, AGED 57 YEARS S/O.NARAYANAN, SORTING ASSISTANT, HEAD RECORD OFFICE, RMS TV DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001, RESIDING AT TC 29/578(I), PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695024

¶88

2 V.JAYAKUMAR, AGED 59 YEARS S/O.VELAYUDHAN PILLAI, SORTING ASSISTANT, HEAD RECORD OFFICE, RMS TV DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001, RESIDING AT ARAVIDN BHAVAN, TC 4/125(5), KOWDIAYR.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695003

¶89

R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.M.A.SHAFIK R1-2 BY ADV. SHRI.KRISHNAKUMARY P.A. R1-2 BY ADV. SHRI.RAMAKRISHNAN D.

¶90

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-06-2020, ALONG WITH OP (CAT).44/2017(Z), OP (CAT).341/2017(Z), OP (CAT).23/2018(Z), OP (CAT).110/2018(Z), OP (CAT).328/2019, THE COURT ON 18-06-2020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶91

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018

¶92

and con.cases - 6 -

¶93

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶94

PRESENT

¶95

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶96

¶97

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶98

THURSDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 28TH JYAISHTA, 1942 OP (CAT).No.328 OF 2019

¶99

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 950/2017 DATED 04-04-2019 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶100

PETITIONERS:

¶101

1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POSTS, NEW DELHI-1110001.

¶102

2 THE CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL KERALA CIRCLE, TRIVADRUM-680121.

¶103

3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES, PATHANAMTHITTA DIVISION, PATHANAMTHITTA689645.

¶104

BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA

¶105

RESPONDENT:

¶106

V.T.EASOW, AGED 66 YEARS S/O. LATE EASOW THOMAS, RETIRED POSTAL ASSISTANT(BCR), PATHANAMTHITTA H O, PATHANAMTHITTA, RESIDING AT VILAVINAL JOY BHAVAN, KODUMTHARA, PATHANAMTHITTA P O, PATHANAMTHITTA-689645.

¶107

R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.A.SHAFIK

¶108

THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-062020, ALONG WITH OP (CAT).44/2017(Z), OP (CAT).341/2017(Z), OP (CAT).23/2018(Z), OP (CAT).110/2018(Z), OP (CAT).315/2019, THE COURT ON 18-062020 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶109

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases

¶110

- 7 -

¶111

JUDGMENT

¶112

Dated, this the 18^th day of June, 2020

¶113

[O.P(CAT) Nos.23/2018, 44/2017, 341/2017, 110/2018, 315/2019, 328/2019]

¶114

Vinod Chandran, J.

¶115

The issue raised in all these appeals is as to whether for the purpose of Modified Assured Career Progression (for short MACP), the stagnation period has to be counted from the date of entry as a Postman or promotion as a Postal Assistant.

¶116

2. The learned Counsel for the applicants rely on the judgment of the Jodhpur Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan, in Civil W.P. No. 11709 of 2013 and connected matters dated 10.08.2015,

¶117

the SLP against which has been dismissed and the decisions of the Division Benches of the Madras, Karnataka and Chathisgarh High Courts respectively in W.P. No. 30629 of 2014 Union of

¶118

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 8 -

¶119

India Vs. D.Sivakumar dated 04.02.2015 , W.P. No. 200807 of 2016 Union of India Vs. Basanna Nayak dated 20.09.2016 and W.P. No. 1903 of 2017 Union of India Vs. Amar singh Sahu dated 15.04.2019.

¶120

3. On a reading of the decisions we find that the decision of the Jodhpur Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan was followed by the Karnataka and Chattisgarh High Courts. The Madras High Court had referred to the CAT decision of the Jodhpur Bench and arrived at the same finding independently. The reasoning of the Jodhpur Bench was that the respondents/employees faced an examination, a limited competitive examination

¶121

for getting selected to the post of Postal Assistant, which is nothing but direct recruitment. The finding was by reason of the Union of India, the petitioner therein, not pointing out any provision for promotion to the post of Postal/Sorting Assistant, which was observed twice in the penultimate paragraph of

¶122

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 9 -

¶123

the judgment. Holding the appointment as Postal Assistant to be a direct recruitment, not in the nature of promotion; for the purpose of MACPS, their service was directed to be counted only from the date they were appointed as a Postal Assistant/Sorting Assistant.

¶124

4. The Division Bench of the Madras High

¶125

Court found in a solitary case that the applicant therein got appointed to the post of Postal Assistant after participating in a selection process and not merely by virtue of the 10 year service he had in the cadre of Postman.

¶126

5. Before the Karnataka High Court the

¶127

Union of India had contended that two promotions were granted to the applicant there, to the post of Postman and Postal Assistant. The appointment order of Postman was looked into, to find the same to be a first entry into service. There can be no quarrel on that as we will notice a bit later. But the promotion to the post of Postal

¶128

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 10 -

¶129

Assistant, though by virtue of a Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE), was held to be not a promotion since it was not shown that there was a promotion possible from the post of Postman to Postal Assistant; as found by the Jodhpur Bench, which decision was referred to and relied upon. The Chhattisgarh High Court relied on the fore cited decisions of the other High Courts.

¶130

6. The learned Central Government Standing Counsel has pointed out the Rules that existed prior to 1990; Ext.P4 produced in OP(CAT) No.23/2018, when the Postal Assistants were called Time Scale Clerks. The applicants where all promoted through a selection process involving a LDCE. A clarification, with respect to Railway Employees on the implementation of the identical scheme is also pointed out. The learned Counsel for the respondents pleaded that even the earlier financial up-gradation as per the Scheme

¶131

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 11 -

¶132

existing in the P&T Department, was granted reckoning their appointment as Postal Assistant.

¶133

7. Ext.P4 produced in OP(CAT) No.23/2018,

¶134

is the Rules for recruitment to the post of Time Scale Clerks and Sorters in the Indian Postal and Telegraph Department (P&T Department). Under the Schedule the method of recruitment is 50% by direct recruitment and 50% by promotion through a LDCE. The feeder category is also the permanent

¶135

or quasi permanent officials below the Time Scale Clerk and Sorters in accordance with the orders issued by the Posts and and Telegraph Board from time to time. A LDCE is also held in the cases of promotion to the 50% quota. The later recruitment rules are produced along with a Memo in O.P.(CAT) No. 341 of 2017, which carry the designation of Postal Assistants; as the Time Scale Clerks were re-designated.

¶136

8. It is submitted by the learned CGSC, Sri. T.V. Vinu that though the applicants would

¶137

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 12 -

¶138

have been entitled to appear for direct recruitment also, all of them have been appointed in the quota set apart for promotion by reason of selection through a LDCE and none have a contention otherwise. We agree with the learned CGSC that the applicants are persons who have been promoted to the post of Postal Assistant through a LDCE. With all the respect at our command, we are unable to agree with the decisions of the various High Courts, on which reliance has been placed by the applicants; for the reasons specified hereafter.

¶139

9. The Rajasthan and Karnataka High

¶140

Courts allowed the claim of the applicants, since it was not demonstrated before them that there

¶141

was a promotion permissible from the post of Postman to Postal Assistant. Here it has been clearly demonstrated that such a promotional avenue is available. The Madras High Court found the appointment as Postal Assistant was not by

¶142

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 13 -

¶143

virtue of the 10 year service as a Postman, but after participating in a selection process. There

¶144

is no reference to a LDCE and in that circumstance it has to be assumed that there the applicant was appointed in the direct recruitment quota. The Chhattisgarh High Court followed the other High Courts. We also are placed with an order in SLP of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, from the decision of the Madras High Court; which though dismissed the SLP, left the question of law open. We hence take a different view especially on the compelling material placed before us by way of the Recruitment Rules.

¶145

10. We extract the Clarification as

¶146

referred to by the CGSC as below:

¶147

“MACP Scheme for Railway servants - treatment of employees selected under LDCE/GDCE Scheme - clarification

¶148

G.I., Railway Board Letter No.PCV/2009/ACP/2, dated the 12^th September, 2012

¶149

References have been received from Zonal Railways seeking clarification regarding

¶150

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases

¶151

- 14 -

¶152

grant of benefits under MACPS in respect of the employees qualifying through LDCE/GDCE. The matter has been examined in consultation with Department of Personnel & Training (DoP&T), the nodal department of Government on MACPS and it has been decided as under:-

¶153

(i) if the relevant RRs provide for filling up of vacancies in a grade by Direct Recruitment, induction of an employee to that grade through LDCE/GDCE may be treated as Direct Recruitment for the purpose of grant of financial upgradation under MACPS. In such cases, past service rendered in a lower pay scale/Grade Pay shall NOT be counted for the purpose of MACP Scheme.

¶154

(ii) If the relevant RRs prescribe a Promotion Quota to be filled on the basis of LDCE/GDCE, such appointment would be treated as promotion for the purpose of benefit under the MACPS and in such cases, past regular service shall also be counted for further benefits, if any, under the MACP Scheme.

¶155

This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Directorate of the Ministry of Railways.”

¶156

11. Clause 9 of the MACPS reads as under:

¶157

“9. Any Interpretation/clarification of doubt as to the scope and meaning of the provisions of the MACP Scheme shall be given by the Department of Personnel and Training

¶158

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 15 -

¶159

(Establishment-D). The scheme would be operational with effect from 1.9.2008. In other words, financial upgradations as per the provisions of the earlier ACP Scheme (of August, 1999) would be granted till 31.08.2008.”

¶160

The clarification issued by the Department of Personnel and Training applies to all the Central Government Departments, irrespective of who seeks the clarification.

¶161

12.It is evident from the Recruitment Rules that the appointment to the post of Postal/Sorting Assistant is not by way of direct recruitment alone and it has a 50% promotion quota of in-service candidate selected by way of a LDCE. Hence the induction by LDCE is not covered by clause (i) and Clause (ii)applies; for there is a specific promotion quota spoken of in the Recruitment Rules.

¶162

13. We also see from the order of the CAT impugned herein especially at Paragraphs 11 and

¶163

12 that the issue has been correctly analysed and

¶164

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 16 -

¶165

the claim “ for counting MACP from the date of passing LDCE is rejected”(sic). But however, in the operative portion in paragraph 13 it was directed that the period to be counted is declared to be from the date of appointment as Postal Assistant, which according to us is not only erroneous; but is diametrically opposite to and against the reasoning as extracted below.

¶166

14. We extract herein paragraphs 11 and 12 of the impugned common order produced in OP (CAT) No.23/2018.

¶167

“11. A promotion is an advancement made in the career of an official in various modes as provided by respondents through various channels. The channel can be by moving to a higher position by virtue of seniority or by a faster channel of qualifying in a departmental examination. Both channels provide a way out of stagnation which has been sought to be alleviated by the TBOP/BCR and MACP Schemes. It depends on the motivation of employee as to which channel he proposes to use for his career advancement. Just because various channels are provided

¶168

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 17 -

¶169

for career advancement, it does not provide a right to applicant to claim that he should be compensated for stagnation at every level of career advancement. He can obtain the dignity, honour, rank or grade by seniority or merit channel provided by respondent, the preference of choice being left to him but both are recognized channels for promotion being provided to him for advancement. The intention of the Pay Commission was that no employee should be allowed to stagnate in a scale of pay for over 10 years. Because the respondent has provided channels for accelerated promotion through a scheme of examination it cannot be obliterated or overlooked and the stand taken that these are not promotions or career advancement can not be accepted. Stagnation is to be counted in the career of an employee and not at every stage of promotion. Promotion by a faster channel of examination has also been provided as a way out of stagnation by the employer, which choice the employee in this case has exercised wisely. Hence applicant cannot claim benefit in both ways or all ways. The fine distinction sought to be drawn between promotion by merit and promotion by length of service in a particular grade is not necessary as both are modes provided for

¶170

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 18 -

¶171

career advancement and the MACP incorporates all the avenues provided to an employee to get out of the runt of stagnation in a system. It should not be selectively applied to individual desire or greed. Reasonable promotional prospects where ever provided should be acknowledged and made a part of the running career advancement and should not be segregated into stagnation pools in the rut of which reliefs are being sought. 12. The judgment of this Tribunal in OA No.725/2012 of 20^th August 2014 applies to the facts of this case and we follow the same. MACP of 10, 20 and 30 years will count from the date of promotion as Postman as the stagnation issue has been addressed by providing him a channel of career advancement by an accelerated mode of promotion by departmental examination. Hence the applicants in Oas Nos 1189, 1190 and 1197 of 2012 are entitled to get MACP only w.e.f the date of completion of 10, 20 and 30 years from the date of promotion as Postman. Claim for counting MACP from the date of passing LDC exam is rejected.”

¶172

15. We perfectly agree with the reasoning

¶173

and add, at the risk of repetition, that it is

¶174

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 19 -

¶175

not relevant as to how the employee gets promoted, by way of seniority or a merit oriented selection. The financial up-gradation as intended

¶176

by the Career Progression Schemes is to ensure that an employee does not suffer the hardship of stagnation, for reason only of there being not available enough avenues for promotion. Such stagnated employees are allowed a financial up-gradation, to the higher scale or the Grade Pay, without a functional promotion to the higher status. The employee having availed a fast track for promotion and acquired it for reason of his superior merit, cannot claim a further upgradation as per the Assured Career Progression Scheme. That would be conferring a double benefit of promotion and financial up-gradation, when by the former his career has progressed.

¶177

16. The applicants were appointed as Postman after being engaged as Extra Departmental Agent (EDA)/ Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS). The Hon'ble

¶178

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 20 -

¶179

Supreme Court in AIR 2016 SC 3789 [Najithamol Y and others v. Soumya S D and others] found that recruitment to the post of Postman is a fresh appointment. Hence the service, for granting MACP has to be counted from that date. We notice the facts in each of the above cases but emphasise that none of the applicants have a contention that they applied under the direct recruitment quota and were appointed as Postal Assistants in that 50% quota. The very contention that they were appointed after being selected in a LDCE validates the stand of the P&T Department that they were promoted to that post; as per the Recruitment Rules.

¶180

17. The MACP Scheme was introduced on 01.09.2008. Prior to that in the Postal Department there were two financial up-gradation; one in the 16^th year under Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) and in the 24^th year, under the Biennial Cadre Review (BCR). When MACP is

¶181

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 21 -

¶182

introduced, the benefits though reckoned on completion of 10,20 and 30 years, the same would be payable only from 01.09.2008.

¶183

18. In O.P (CAT) No.23/2018, the

¶184

respondent was originally recruited as a Gramin Dak Sevak(GDS)- earlier E.D Agent, on 05.02.1979. He was appointed as a Postman in the direct entry cadre as on 22.11.1979 and was promoted as Postal Assistant consequent to LDCE for promotion as

¶185

prescribed in the Recruitment Rules, on 27.09.1983. Within the first ten years he obtained a promotion. He was then granted financial up-gradation of TBOP on 07.10.1999;

¶186

before MACP Scheme was introduced. The respondent hence is dis-entitled from the first two upgradations under MACPS.

¶187

19. The respondent in OP(CAT) No.341/2017 was recruited as Sepoy in the Army Postal Service in 1983 and joined the civil side of the Postal Department in Group D cadre on 28.11.1986; his

¶188

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 22 -

¶189

entry into regular service. He was promoted as Postal Assistant in 1989 pursuant to LDCE. This dis-entitles him to the first MACP. He was then granted TBOP on completion of 16 years in the year 2005, which dis-entitles him to the second MACP also.

¶190

20. The respondents in O.P(CAT) No.110/2018 were recruited as GDS respectively in 1971 and 1972. The 1^st respondent was appointed as Postman in the year 1977 and the 2^nd applicant in 1979. They were promoted as Postal Assistant, selected through a LDCE, in the year 1981 and 1982. They were then granted TBOP on completion of 16 years as per the then existing scheme of TBOP. On 01.09.2008, when the Scheme was introduced, they had the benefit of one promotion and a financial up-gradation.

¶191

21. In O.P (CAT) No.328/2019, the

¶192

respondent was originally recruited as an E.D Agent. He was appointed as a Postman in the

¶193

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 23 -

¶194

direct entry cadre as on 08.11.1972 and was promoted as Postal Assistant appearing in a LDCE on 11.09.1978. He was then granted financial upgradation of TBOP on 15.09.1994. He was also granted the benefit of up-gradation under the BRC with effect from 01.01.2005. The respondent hence got a promotion in his career and two financial up-gradations, which completely fulfils the obligation of the Department under the MACPS Scheme.

¶195

22. In O.P (CAT) No.315/2019, the

¶196

respondents were originally recruited as Gramin Dak Sevak(GDS) in 1981 and appointed as Group-D in 1990. They were promoted in the LDCE exam as Postal/Sorting Assistants in March 1993 and upgradation on TBOP was granted respectively on 06.04.2009 and 09.04.2009. The respondent are, hence dis-entitled from the first two upgradations under MACPS.

¶197

23. In O.P (CAT) No.44/2017, the

¶198

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 24 -

¶199

respondent joined as Postman on 26.11.1979, promoted as Selection Grade Postman on 07.06.1983, then promoted as Postal Assistant on 08.02.1991 and also granted up-gradation under TBOP on 22.03.2007. She can have no grievance of stagnation.

¶200

Original Petitions (CAT) are allowed. No order as to costs.

¶201

Sd/K. Vinod Chandran, Judge

¶202

Sd/P.V.Kunhikrishnan, Judge

¶203

jma

¶204

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases

¶205

- 25 -

¶206

APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 23/2018

¶207

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶208

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED OA NO.1189 OF 2012 DATED 02.04.2014 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE CAT,ERNAKULAM BENCH

¶209

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN O.A.NO.1189 OF 2012 DATED 20.03.2015,FILED BY THE PETITIONERS EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.A NO:1189 OF 2012 DATED 12.11.2015 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INDIAN POST AND TELEGRAPH(TIME SCALE CLERKS AND SORTERS)RECRUITMENT RULES,1971 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW APPLICATION NO.59 OF 2017 IN O.A.NO.1189 OF 2012 DATED 11.09.2017.

¶210

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.11.2017 IN R.A.NO.59 OF 2017 IN O.A.NO.1189 OF 2012.

¶211

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases

¶212

- 26 -

¶213

APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 44/2017

¶214

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶215

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.B1/MACPs/DIG DATED 30.10.2013 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.C/1459 DATED 15.11.2013 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A3. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. POSTAL/2013/KE/21870/DCRG/PEN 2-521 DATED 11.11.2013 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A4. TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.B2/RECTT/POSTMAN/ST/79 DATED 14.11.1979 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A5. TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.CL-1 DATED 28.11.1979 ISSUED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POSTS, TRICHUR NORTH SUB DIVISION. ANNEXURE A6. TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.B1/18/DIG/IX DATED 14.05.2007 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF THE OM FILE NO. 4-7 (MACPS)/2009-PCC DATED 18.09.2009 ISSUED BY THE DDG (ESTABLISMENT) OF THE IST RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A8. TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.B1/MACPS/DIGs DATED 06.08.2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE A9. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22.05.2012 OF JODHPUR BENCH OF THIS HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL IN OA NO. 353/2011. ANNEXURE A10. TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.11.2013 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE R1. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA NOS. 127/2012 DATED 07.08.2013 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. ANNEXURE RA1. TRUE COPY ORDER DATED 16.03.2016 IN OA NO. 8/2014 OF THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH.

¶216

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 27 -

¶217

ANNEXURE RA2.	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.09.2014 IN RP NO. 441/2014 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.4131/2014 OF THE HONOURABLE DELHI HIGH COURT.
ANNEXURE RA3.	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.08.2014 IN OA NO. 725/2012 OF THIS HONOURABLE TRIBUNAL.
EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO. 180/00008/2014 DATED 16.12.2013, FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT IN 180/00008/2014 DATED 17.03.2014, FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER DATED 14.06.2014 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL REPLY STATEMENT DATED 11.08.2014, FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA NO. 180/00008/2014 DATED 16.03.2016 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE R.A. NO. 180/00038/2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.A. NO. 180/00038/2016 DATED 29.08.2016 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.

¶218

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases

¶219

- 28 -

¶220

APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 341/2017

¶221

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶222

ANNEXURE A1	TRUE COPY OF ORDERS NUMBER B/M-25 DATED 26.11.2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
ANNEXURE A2	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATIONS DATED 15.11.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT
ANNEXURE A3	TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER DATED 22.05.2012 IN O.A.NO.382/2011 OF THE JODHPUR BENCH OF THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL
ANNEXURE R1	TRUE COPY OF CLARIFICATION ON MACP RULINGS ISSUED BY DIRECTORATE VIDE LETTER NO.4- 7/MACPS/2009-PCC DATED 18.10.2010
ANNEXURE R2	TRUE COPY OF COMMON ORDER OF HON'BLE CAT ERNAKULAM BENCH IN O.A.NO.127/12, 142/12,702/12 DECIDED ON 07.08.2013
ANNEXURE A4	TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER DATED 21.12.2012 IN O.A.3756 OF 2011 OF HON'BLE PRINCIPAL BENCH OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ANNEXURE A5	TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER DATED 05.08.2014 IN W.P.C.NO.4131 OF 2014 OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ANNEXURE RA1	TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 10.06.2015 IN O.A.NO.1190/2012
ANNEXURE RA2	TRUE COPY OF DATED 29.09.2014 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN RP NO.441/2014 & CM NO.15847 OF 2014
ANNEXURE RA3	TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 20.08.2014 OA NO.725/2012 OF THE TRIBUNAL
ANNEXURE MA1	TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER DATED 12.11.2015 IN OA.NO.1190 OF 2012 OF THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO.1190 OF 2012 DATED 18.12.2012 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN
	O.A.NO.1190 OF 2012 DATED 24.07.2012,

¶223

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018

¶224

and con.cases - 29 -

¶225

FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.

¶226

EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER IN OA NO.1190 OF 2012 DATED 09.12.2013, FILED BY THE APPLICANT.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL REPLY STATEMENT IN O.A NO.1190 OF 2012 DATED 05.02.2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE MA NO.1082 OF 2014 IN O.A NO.1190 OF 2012 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 10.10.2014.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA NO.1190 OF 2012 DATED 10.06.2015 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW APPLICATION NO.12 OF 2015 IN OA NO.1190 OF 2012 DATED 08.07.2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA NO.1190 OF 2012 DATED 12.11.2015 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE INDIAN POST AND TELEGRAPH (TIME SCALE CLERKS AND SORTERS) RECRUITMENT RULES, 1971.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF MA NO.728 OF 2017 DATED 27.07.2017 IN O.A NO.1190 OF 2012.
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF REVIEW APPLICATION NO.55 OF 2017 IN O.A NO.1190 OF 2012 DATED 22.08.2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.10.2017 IN RA NO.55 OF 2017 IN OA. NO.1190 OF 2012.

¶227

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018

¶228

and con.cases - 30 -

¶229

APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 110/2018

¶230

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶231

ANNEXURE A1	TRUE COPY OF ORDER BEARING NUMBERS B/T-10 DATED 06/11/2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A2	TRUE COPY OF ORDER BEARING NUMBER B/A-2 DATED 06/11/2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A3	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B/MACP/3 DATED 25/08/2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A4	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATIONS DATED 19/10/2012.
ANNEXURE A5	TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATIONS DATED 30/10/2012.
ANNEXURE A6	TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER DATED 22/05/2012 IN OA NO.382/2011 OF THE JODHPUR BENCH OF THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL.
ANNEXURE R1	TRUE COPY OF THE MACP RULINGS ISSUED BY DIRECTORATE LETTER NO.4-7/MACP/2009-PCC DATED 18/10/2010.
ANNEXURE R1	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA NO.127/2012 DATED 07/08/2012 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
ANNEXURE A7	TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER DATED 21/12/2012 IN OA NO.3756/2011 OF HON'BLE PRINCIPAL BENCH OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL.
ANNEXURE A8	TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER DATED 05/08/2014 IN W.P.(C) NO.4131/2014 OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI.
ANNEXURE R2	TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 29/09/2014 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN R.P.NO.441/2014 & CM NO.15847 OF 2014.
ANNEXURE R3	TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 20/08/2014 IN OA NO.725/2012 FILED BY T.M.POULOSE & ANOTHER.
ANNEXURE RA1	TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 12/11/2015 IN OA

¶232

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018

¶233

and con.cases - 31 -

¶234

NO.1197 OF 2012.

¶235

ANNEXURE RA2	TRUE COPY OF INDIAN POST AND TELEGRAPH (TIME SCALE CLERKS AND SORTERS) RECRUITMENTS RULES, 1971.
EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION IN OA 1197 OF 2012, DATED 18.12.2012 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN OA NO.1197 OF 2012 DATED 28.08.2013, FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER IN OA NO.1197 OF 2012 DATED 07.12.2013.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL REPLY STATEMENT IN OA NO.1197 OF 2012 DATED 12.05.2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE MA NO.1083/2014 IN OA NO.1197 OF 2012 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS DATED 10.10.2014.
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE PETITIONERS IN THE MA NO.1083 OF 2014 DATED 25.08.2015.
EXHIBIT P7	CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA NO.1197 OF 2012 DATED 12.11.2015 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE INDIAN POST AND TELEGRAPH (TIME SCALE CLERKS AND SORTERS) RECRUITMENT RULES, 1971.
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE REVIEW APPLICATION NO.180/00059 OF 2017 IN OA NO.1197 OF 2012 DATED 11.09.2017.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY OF THE MA/180/00970/2017 RA.59/17 IN OA.1197/12 DATED 11.9.17.
EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN R.A.NO.180/00059/2017 AS WELL AS MA/180/00970/2017, DATED 15.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH.

¶236

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases

¶237

- 32 -

¶238

APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 315/2019

¶239

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶240

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO.180/00817/2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 22.09.2017 BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN OA 180/00817/2017 DATED 27.05.2018 FILED BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN OA 180/00817/2017 DATED 12.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE CAT, ERNAKULAM
EXHIBIT P1(A1)	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.ST/101- 6/M/18/2017 DATED 4.8.2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P1(A4)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B-1/MACP/SAS DATED 13.7.2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P1(A2)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B/34/TBOP/08-09 DATED 6.8.2009 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P1(A3)	TRUE COPY OF THE OM FILE NO.4-7/ (MACPS)/2009-PCC DATED 18.09.2009 ISSUED BY THE DG(ESTABLISHMENT) OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P1(A5)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.3.2016 IN O.A.180/0008/2014
EXHIBIT P1(A6)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.3.2013 IN O.A.NO.1088/2011 OF THE MADRAS BENCH
EXHIBIT P1(A7)	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.2.2015 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS IN W.P.NO.30629/2014
EXHIBIT P1(A8)	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.08.2016 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN SLP (C)NO.4848/2016
EXHIBIT P1(A9)	TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.B2/MACP III/DLGS.2016 DATED 22.3.2017 OF BY THE SR.SUPT OF POST OFFICES, CHENNAI

¶241

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 33 -

¶242

EXHIBIT P1(A10) TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.6.2017 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDNET EXHIBIT P2(A1) TRUE COPY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF POSTS(POSTAL ASSISTANT AND SORTING ASSISTANTS) RECRUITMENT(AMENDMENT) RULES,1991 EXHIBIT P2(A2) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B-1/MACP/GNL DATED 08.08.2017 EXHIBIT P2(A3) TRUE COPY OF ANNEXURE-I TO ANNEXURE A -3 EXHIBTI P2(A4) TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 07.08.2013 IN OA NO.127/2012 EXHIBIT P2(A5) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.08.2014 IN OA NO.725/2012 EXHIBIT P2(A6) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.5.2017 IN OA NO.448/2014 EXHIBIT P2(A7) TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS IN OP(CAT) NO.44/2017 DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶243

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases

¶244

- 34 -

¶245

APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 328/2019

¶246

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶247

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE OA NO.180/00959/2017 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 11.11.2017 BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH. EXHIBIT P1(A1) TRUE COPY OF THE SELECTION MEMO NO. B/MACP/RIGS DATED 15.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A2) TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO. BB/TBOP DATED 12.09.1994 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A3) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.ST/8-3/1/2005 DATED 27.05.2005 ISSUED BY THE APMG (STAFF) OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A4) TRUE COPY OF THE OM FILE NO.4-7/(MACPS) 2009-PCC DATED 18.09.2009 ISSUED BY THE DDG (ESTABLISHMENT) OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P1(A5) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.03.2016 IN OA NO.180/0008/2014 ISSUED BY THE CAT ERNAKULAM BENCH. EXHIBIT P1(P6) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.03.2013 IN OA NO. 1088/2011 OF THE MADRAS BENCH. EXHIBIT P1(A7) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.02.2015 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS IN WP NO.30629/2014. EXHIBIT P1(A8) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.08.2016 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN SLP(C) NO.4848/2016. EXHIBIT P1(A9) TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO.B2/MACP III/DLGS 2016 DATED 22.03.2017 OF BY THE SR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES, CHENNAI. EXHIBIT P1(A10) TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07.07.2017 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD

¶248

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018

¶249

and con.cases - 35 -

¶250

RESPONDENT.

¶251

EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN OA 180/00957/2017 DATED 13.06.2018 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH
EXHIBIT P2(A1)	TRUE COPY OF THE DIRECTORATE LETTER NO. 4-7(MACPS)/2009-PCC DATED 18.10.2010.
EXHIBIT P2(A2)	TRUE COPY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF POSTS(POSTAL ASSISTANT AND SORTING ASSISTANCE) RECRUITMENT RULES, 1972.
EXHIBIT P2(A3)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 07.08.2013 OF THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN OA 127/2012 AND CONNECTED CASES.
EXHIBIT P2(A4)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.08.2014 OF THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN OA NO.752/2012
EXHIBIT P2(A5)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.05.2014 OF THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN OA NO. 448/2014.
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE REJOINDER IN OA 180/00950/2017 DATED 15.11.2018 FILED BY THE APPLICANTS BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT P3(A11)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.11.2015 OF THE PRINCIPAL BENCH OF THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN OA 3756/2011.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ADDL.REPLY STATEMENT IN OA 180/00950/2017 DATED 26.03.2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT P4(A6)	TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS OF WP(C)2806/2016 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI, DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI, DATED 1.04.2016.
EXHIBIT P4(A7)	TRUE COPY OF DOWNLOADED CASE STATUS IN WP(C) NO.2806/2016, WP(C) 7756/2016, WP(C 2505/2018 AND WP(C) NO.7504/2013 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI.
EXHIBIT P4(A8)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.08.2018 IN WP(C) NO.57935/2017 (S-CAT) IN OS 17/20 OF

¶252

O.P(CAT) Nos. 23/2018 and con.cases - 36 -

¶253

HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA.

¶254

EXHIBIT P4(A9) TRUE COPY OF COMMON ORDER DATED 10.05.2018 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JABATPUR BENCH.

¶255

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN OA 180/00950/2017 DATED 04.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH.

Union of India v. Thomas P.D.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India v. Thomas P.D.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brinda a.J, Vs M.S.Hameed

The Manager, Vs Smt.Suseela

Sathyabhama P. Vs State of Kerala

Union of India Vs S.Sivadasan

Director of Animal Husbandry Vs Dr. K.Narayana Pillai

Krishna Kumaran.E Vs Superintendent of Post Offices