Telangana High Court
The Union Of India vs Y. Venkateswarlu on 16 July, 2024
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
WRIT PETITION No.23542 of 2021
ORDER:
(per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili) This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad, (for short, 'the Tribunal') in O.A.No.800 of 2018, dated 12.10.2020.
2. Heard learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for petitioners and Sri Pavan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for Sri A.Raghu Kumar, learned counsel for respondents on record.
3. It has been contended by the petitioners that respondents are working as Assistant Superintendents of Post Offices and they are contending that they are entitled for extending of 2nd/3rd financial upgradation as per Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS). When the same was not extended to them, they have approached the Tribunal by filing O.A.No.800 2 of 2018 and the Tribunal was pleased to allow the said O.A., and directed the petitioners to pay financial upgradation as per MACPS, without appreciating any of the contentions raised by the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for petitioners further contended that respondents were promoted from Postal Assistants to Inspector of Posts and as respondents were already promoted, the question of extending 2nd/3rd financial upgradation would not arise and therefore, appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition by setting aside the order passed by the Tribunal in O.A.No.800 of 2018, dated 12.10.2020.
5. Learned counsel for respondents contended that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in O.A.No.382 of 2011, dated 22.05.2012 and it was also covered by the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal of Madras Bench in O.A.No.1088 of 2011, dated 14.03.2013 and the State had carried the matter to the Madras High Court by filing W.P.No.30629 of 2014 and the Madras High 3 Court was pleased to dismiss the said writ petition confirming the orders passed by the Madras High Court vide order dated 04.02.2015. The State had further carried the matter to the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing SLP No.4848 of 2016 and the said SLP was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 16.08.2016.
6. Later, the State had filed the review petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Review Petition No.1939 of 2017 in SLP No.4848 of 2016 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court was also pleased to dismiss the said review petition vide order, dated 13.09.2017. Therefore, the issue involved in the writ petition is squarely covered by the judgments rendered by the CAT of Madras Bench, High Court of Madras and the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Tribunal was justified in allowing the O.A.NO.800 of 2018 in favour of the respondents by following those judgments. There are no merits in the writ petition and is liable to be dismissed.
7. This Court, having considered the rival submissions made by the parties, is of the view that the Tribunal was justified in 4 allowing the O.A.No.800 of 2018 dated 12.10.2020 in favour of the respondents by following the judgments passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench in O.A.No.1088 of 2011 dated 14.03.2013, which was confirmed by the Madras High Court and also the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly allowed the O.A. No.800 of 2018, dated 12.10.2020 in favour of the respondents. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 12.10.2020 passed by the Tribunal.
8. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J ___________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Date: 16.07.2024 kkm