Kerala High Court
The Chief Postmaster General vs A.P Balakrishnan Embranthiri on 11 June, 2024
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 21ST JYAISHTA, 1946
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED20.07.2017 IN OA NO.216 OF 2016 OF
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH
PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL
KERALA CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN CODE - 695033
2 THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTS (POSTAL),
KERALA CIRCLE,4TH FLOOR, GPO BUILDINGS,
THIRUVNANTHAPURAM-695001
3 THE SPUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICE,
KASARAGOD DIVISION, KASARAGOD-671121.
4 THE POST MASTER GENERAL,
NORTHERN REGION, CLAICUT-673011
BY ADVS.
SRI.T.V.VINU, CGC
RESPONDENTS:
A.P BALAKRISHNAN EMBRANTHIRI
S/O. GANAPATHY EMBRANTHIRI, RETIRED HEAD POST MASTER,
BHADRA VILASOM PATTENA, NEELESHWAR,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671 314
BY ADV U.BALAGANGADHARAN
THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.06.2024, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
2
JUDGMENT
Amit Rawal, J.
1. Present petition is directed at the instance of the
Chief Post Master General and Others against the judgment of
the Central Administrative Tribunal rendered in O.A.No.216 of
2016 dated 20.07.2017 and review order dated 02.04.2018.
2. Succinctly, the facts in brief are that the
respondent-applicant retired as Head Postmaster (HSG-I
officiating). The increment prior to the implementation of VIth
Central Pay Commission was due on 1st of May every year.
As he was not granted the benefit, submitted a representation
dated 02.12.2015 wherein reference was shown of a similarly
situated person, one Sri.V.A.Kumaran, Senior Superintendent
of Post Offices, who retired on 31.03.2006 and whose
increment due on 1st of April every year was granted in terms
of the order passed in O.A.No.89 of 2013 which was affirmed
by the High Court of Kerala. Despite that, representation was
rejected, against which preferred a claim by making following
prayers:
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
i. Call for the records leading to Annexure A5 and quash
the same as illegal;
ii) Direct the respondents 1 and 3 to grant one increment
to the applicant and notionally refix the pension with
all consequential benefits;
iii) Direct the respondents 1 and 2 to extent the benefit of
Annexure A1 Office Memorandum to the applicant and
grant all consequential benefits including revision of
pension and arrears thereof.
iv) Declare that the applicant is entitled to get benefit of
Annexure A1 Office Memorandum in the light of
Annexures A2 and A3 judgment and further he is
entitled get all monetary benefits flowing therefrom;
v) Such other reliefs that the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit in
the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. Petitioners-respondents denied the aforementioned
assertions on the premise that two increments was due to the
applicant between 01.01.2006 and 30.05.2006 ie., the date
on which he superannuated. Learned Tribunal noticing that
the matter was squarely covered by the decision rendered
in O.A.No.89 of 2013 dated 10.02.2014 (Annexure A2)
and Annexure-A1, a presidential order issued in relaxation
of Rule 10 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, granting one-time
benefit of one increment to those Central Government
employees who were due to get their annual increments
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
between February and June, 2006, in the pre-revised scale as
on 01.01.2006, allowed the claim of the applicant.
3. Sri.T.V.Vinu, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioners submitted that the Tribunal committed an
error in allowing the claim and also review filed by recalling of
the order for the reason that the applicant retired on
30.05.2006, between 01.01.2006 and till the date of
retirement, no increment was due. Therefore, there was no
similarity in the decided case. Annexure-RA-1 clearly stated
that one additional increment was applicable only to those
employees who were due for increment between February
and June 2006. But the officials who were not in service on
their due date of next increment would not be eligible for
additional increment as on 01.01.2006. The order passed in
O.A.No.89 of 2013 was before Annexure-RA-1 order and the
confirmation of the said order by this Court was dated
14.01.2015. Therefore, the order and judgment can be
treated as a binding precedent.
4. The pay of the applicant-respondent was as per the
VIth pay recommendation fixed with effect from 01.01.2006
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
accordingly pension was also revised. Differences of pension
was paid in accordance with the provision of Rule 10 of CCS
(RP) Rules, 2008 and the date of annual increment due was
fixed as 1st of July every year. The 1st increment after pay
fixation on 01.01.2006 in revised pay structure was to be
granted on 01.07.2006.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent submitted that there is no illegality
and perversity in the judgment of the Central Administrative
Tribunal. Matter is squarely covered by the decision rendered
in O.A.No.89 of 2013 dated 10.02.2014.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties
and appraised the paper book and are of the view that there
is no force and merit.
7. Contents of Annexure-A5 order rejecting the
representation, reads as under:
"With reference to your representation cited above
Chief Postmaster General Kerala Circle
Thiruvananthapuram vide C.O.letter
no.AP/110-RP/2015/DLG dated 4-2-16 has examined the
case in detail and informed as follows.
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
"[1]As per orders contained in GOI MOF OM No.10/2/2011
EIII/A dated 19/3/2012 officials who were due to get their
annual increment from February to June 2006 may be
granted one increment on 1-1-2006 in the pre-revised pay
scale as a one time measure and thereafter will get the
next increment in the revised pay structure on 1-7-2006
as per Rule 10 of CCS [RP] Rules 2008. In his case no
increment was due to him between 01.01.2006 and
30.04.2006 i.e. the date on which he retired from service
on superannuation and as such he is not eligible for the
refixation of pay as per the provisions contained in the
afore-said OM."
"[ii]The orders of the Hon'ble CAT Ernakulam Bench as
mentioned in the representation of the retired official are
applicable only to the relevant case and the benefits
thereon cannot be extended to others."
As such it is informed that you are not eligible for
the refixation of pay as detailed above."
8. No doubt the representation was not decided after
having afforded the opportunity. Be that as it may. The fact
remains Annexure-A1 dated 19.03.2012 granted the benefit
of increments to all the employees between February to June,
2006. The contents of the same reads as under:
"In accordance with the provisions contained in Rule
10 of the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, there will be a uniform
date of annual increment, viz. 1st July of every year.
Employees completing 6 months and above in the revised
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
pay structure as on 1st July will be eligible to be granted
the increment. The first increment after fixation of pay on
1.1.2006 in the revised pay structure will be granted on
1.7.2006 for those employees for whom the date of next
increment was between 1st July, 2006 to 1st January,
2007.
2.The Staff Side has represented on this issue and has
requested that those employees who were due to get
their annual increment between February to June during
2006 may be granted one increment on 01.01.2006 in the
pre-revised scale.
3.On further consideration and in exercise of the powers
available under CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, the President is
pleased to decide that in relaxation of stipulation under
Rule 10 of the Rules, those central government
employees who were due to get their annual increment
between February to June during 2006 may be granted
one increment on 1.1.2006 in the pre-revised pay scale as
a one time measure and thereafter will get the next
increment in the revised pay structure on 1.7.2006 as per
Rule 10 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008. The pay of the eligible
employees may be re-fixed accordingly.
4.In so far as the persons serving in the Indian Audi and
Account Department are concerned, these orders are
issued in consultation with the Comptroller & Auditor
General of India.
(Renu Jain) Director
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
ALL INDIA CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
Month Base Year Total for Twelve % Increase
2001=100 12 Monthly Average Over
months 115.76
June 2011 189 2203 183.58 58.59
July 2011 193 2218 184.83 59.67
Aug 2011 194 2234 186.17 6082
Sep 2011 197 2252 187.67 62.12
Oct 2011 198 2269 189.08 63.33
Nov. 2011 199 2286 190.50 64.56
Dec. 2011 197 2298 191.05 65.43
Dearness Relief from 1.1.2012 is 65% an increase of 7% over
01.07.2011. Government orders are expected shortly.
9. On going through the contents of the grounds
taken, there is no denial to the existence of document dated
19.03.2012. The said document has not been taken into
consideration while rejecting the representation which has
been emphatically relied upon by the Tribunal in paragraph 6
of the judgment. The same reads as under:
"6. Annexure A1 is a Presidential order issued in
relaxation of Rule 10 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 which
grants an one time benefit of one increment to those
Central Government employees who were due to get their
annual increments between February and June 2006, in
the pre-revised scale on 1.1.2006. The wordings in
Annexure A1 are unambiguous. It is surprising to note
that despite the aforesaid clear wordings in Annexure A1
and despite the adjudication on the same subject matter
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
by this Tribunal and by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in
Annexures A2 and A3 decisions respectively, the
respondents failed to note that one need to have
continuous service of one year for qualifying to get
increment as per the special provision and one time
measure granted in Annexure A1 in relaxation of the
stipulation under Rule 10 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008."
10. Grant of annual increment between February to
June, 2006 was one-time measure to rectify the inequality
suffered by the employees while implementing Rule 10 of
CCS(RP) Rules, 2008, prescribing uniform rate of annual
increment for all Central Government employees ie., 1st July
of every year. That could not mean that the increment would
have fallen due to the applicant on 1st of July and by that time
he had retired. Consistent stand of the petitioner had been
that the decision of the Tribunal in O.A.89 of 2013 was
applicable to the relevant case and not to others. That fact
has been deprecated by the Tribunal in paragraph 9, the
same is extracted hereinbelow:
"It is settled law that once the Courts lay down the
law, it is not for the administrative authorities to
contradict the same by taking different contentions. This
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
is exactly what has been done by respondent No.1 in the
instant case by taking a specious stand that the decision
of this Tribunal is applicable to the relevant cases only
and not to others. It is high time that the administrative
authorities understand that the decisions of the Tribunal
and those of the High Court's are not only adjudications of
the case/controversy in the cases but also explain the law
relating to the issue involved in such cases. If the
administrator denigrates or debunk the law laid down in
such decisions by holding that the same will not be
applicable in other cases - even to similarly situated cases
- that would be a sad day for the court decisions and for
the rule of law."
We do not find any illegality and perversity in the order
of the Tribunal. No ground for interference is made out.
OP(CAT) stands dismissed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL, JUDGE
Sd/-
EASWARAN S., JUDGE
nak
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 160/2018
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COY OF THE OA.NO.180/00216/2016
DATED 10.3.2016,FILED BY THE
RESPONDENT.
Annexure A5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT DATED NIL OF FEBRUARY
Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF OFFICE MEMORANDUM ISSUED
BY THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE DATED
19.03.2012
Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.02.2014
IN O.S.NO.89/2013 PASSED BY THIS
HON'BLE TRIBUNAL.
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
14.01.2015 IN OP(CAT) NO. 136/2014
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF
KERALA.
Annexure A4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
02.12.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT
TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
Annexure R1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.
AP/110-RP/2015/DLG DATED 04.02.2016
ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.
Annexure R2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.
C1/PEN/190/2015-16 DATED 22.02.2016 OF
3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN
O.A.NO,180/00216/2016,DATED 26.12.2016
FILED BY THE PETITIONERS.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN
OA.NO,180/00216/2016 DATED 20.7.2017 OF
THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
OP (CAT) NO. 160 OF 2018
ERNAKULAM BENCH.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RA.NO,180/00216/2016
DATED 11.12.2017 FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS.
Annexure RA1 TRUE COPY OF THE DIRECTORATE ORDER NO.
4-4/2008 - PCC(CORR) DATED 04.06.2014.
Annexure RA2 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER DATED
20.07.2017 IN O.A NO. 216/2016 OF
HON'BLE CAT ERNAKULAM BENCH
EXHIBIT P5 TUR COPY OF THE ORDER IN
RA.NO,180/00001/2018 DATED 02.4.2018 OF
THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
ERNAKULAM BENCH.
