The Union Of India vs Padmanabha Poojary
2022 Latest Caselaw 7845 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 7845 Kant
Judgement Date : 1 June, 2022

Karnataka High Court

The Union Of India vs Padmanabha Poojary on 1 June, 2022

Bench: B.Veerappa, K S Hemalekha

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

          DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                        PRESENT

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA

                          AND

         THE HON'BLE Mrs. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

         WRIT PETITION NO.11054/2021 (S-CAT)

BETWEEN:
1.     THE UNION OF INDIA,
       REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,
       DEPARTMENT OF POST,
       DAK BHAVAN,
       NEW DELHI - 110 001.

2.     CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL.
       KARNATAKA CIRCLE,
       BENGALURU - 560 000.

3.     POST MASTER GENERAL,
       S.K.REGION,
       AT BENGALURU GPO,
       BANGALURU - 560 001.

4.     SENIOR SUPT. OF POST OFFICES,
       MANGALURU POSTAL DIVISION,
       MANGALURU - 575 002.
                                         ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI SHUBHAS, ADVOCATE)

AND:
1.     PADMANABHA POOJARY,
       AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
       S/O VASU POOJARY,
       WORKING AS POSTMAN,
                        -2-


     KANKANADY POST OFFICES,
     MANGALURU - 575 002.

     R/AT NO.2-153(91-2),
     HARIPADE,
     KOIKUDE POST AND VILLAGE,
     VIA BELTHANGADI - 574 146.

2.   KOOSA,
     AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
     S/O KORGYA GOWDA,
     WORKING AS POSTMAN,
     MANGALURU H.O.,
     R/AT SRI DEVI PRASAD HOUSE,
     KANNORI, YEDAPADVU P.O.,
     SIBRIKERE - 574 164.

3.   HARISH SHETTGAR,
     AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
     S/O TUKARAM SHETTIGAR,
     WORKING AS POSTMAN,
     ASHOKNAGAR P.O.,
     MANGALURU - 575 006.
                                   ...RESPONDENTS
(R1 TO R3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESETED)

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 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.170/00296/2017.

     THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THIS DAY, B.VEERAPPA J., MADE THE
FOLLOWING:-
                             -3-


                         ORDER

Respondents are the original applicants before the

Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as

'the CAT' for short) in OA No.170/00296/2017, filed the

original application for the relief to quash the letter dated

21.04.2017 issued by the Senior Superintendent of Post

Offices, Mangaluru Division vide Annexure-A7 and direct

the respondents to place the applicants under CCS

(Pension) Rules, 1972 for pensionary benefits and direct

the respondents to recover the GPF contribution from the

applicants and further to refund the contribution recovered

towards new pension scheme etc.,

2. The CAT after hearing both the parties by

order dated 25.10.2018 allowed the original application

holding that the applicants are also part of the governance

system then the DoPT circular relating to continuance of

service must operate in favour of the applicants also, it is

once again declared that the applicants are eligible for the

Old Pension Scheme from the date of appointment as GDS

and not on the selected/promoted date to the post of

Postman, which is later on and accordingly, Original

Application was allowed and benefits were ordered to be

made available within two months. Against the said order,

the present writ petition came to be filed by the Union of

India.

3. Respondent Nos.1 to 3 are served and

unrepresented.

4. Smt. Shubha S., learned counsel for the

applicants has drawn the attention of this Court to the

judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union

of India and others vs. Gandiba Behera and

connected matters dated 08.11.2019 made in Civil

Appeal No.8497/2019 arising out of SLP (C)

No.13042/2014 and connected matters, wherein the

Hon'ble Apex Court already decided the issue involved in

the present case and issue is no longer res integra and the

Hon'ble Apex Court at paragraphs Nos. 20 to 23 held 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 service rendered by the respondents in the capacity of GDS could be added to thier regular tenure in the postal department for the purpose of fulfilling the period of qualifying service on the question of grant of pension.

21. We are also of the opinion that the authorities ought to consider their cases for exercising the power to relax the mandatory requirement of qualifying service under the 1972 Rules if they find the conditions contained in Rule 88 stand fulfilled in any of these cases. We do not accept the stand of the appellants that just because that exercise would be prolonged, 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 case 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 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.