30th JUNE RETIREES ANNUAL INCREMENT CASE
REMEMBER - OUR PRAYER STANDS REJECTED BY TRIBUNAL - BUT WE ARE FILING APPEAL IN MADRAS HIGH COURT
THIS COPY MAY BE USED FOR FILING PETITIONS IN DIFFERENT CATs BY TAKING APPROPRIATE POINTS IN OTHER AFFIDAVITS
- KR GS AIPRPA -
BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
MADRAS BENCH
O.A. No. of 2019
1. K. Ragavendran,
Retired Assistant Postmaster,
Old No. 44, New No. 2, MuthialChetty Street,
Purasawakkam,
Chennai – 600 007.
2. A. Ponnusamy,
Retired Sub-Postmaster,
No. 8/198, Holden Nagar,
Pallipadai,
Chidambaram – 608 001.
3. A. Maruthai,
Retired Sub-Postmaster,
No. 4/182, Vinayaka Nagar 3rd Street,
N.S. Nagar,
Dindigul – 624 001.
4. M. Anwar Basha,
Pricp, Egmore MDO,
No. 48, Raman Street,
Royapuram,
qChennai – 600 013.
5. P. Ponnurangam,
Retired Postman,
No. 232, PerumalKoil Street,
Madipakkam Village & P.O,
Cheyyar Taluk, T.V. Malai District – 631 701.
6. M. Devaraj,
No. 1131, Sri PUshpagiriVelan Nagar,
Udumalaipet – 642 126.
7. S. Rajamani Srinivasan,
No. 59, Sowthamalar Lay Out,
Udumalpet – 642 126.
8. T. Kandiappan,
No. 103, Singapore Nagar,
Udmalpet – 642 126.
9. R. Narayanasamy,
No. 1/247, Thumbalapatti,
Udumalpet – 642 154.
10. S. Paramasivam,
No. 59, N Madhu Nagar,
Pulankinar – 642 122.
11. N. Muthusamy,
No. 18, Sivalingam Pillai Lay Out,
Venkatesa Mills PO – 642 128.
12. M. Shakul Hameed,
No. 9A, Shandrothaya Garden (Ex),
MP Nagar,
Udumalpet – 642 126.
13. K.N. Mahalingam,
No. 4/360, D SMD Garden,
Gandhipuram,
GandhiNagar – 642 154.
14. A. Annathurai,
No. 86, C Pandian Street,
Madathukulam – 642 113.
15. S. Palavesam,
Supervisor (SBCO) Retired,
No. 5/1614, Dhasiahpuram,
Evavankulam Road,
Sankarankovil – 627 756.
16. T.G. Subramaniyan,
Retired Postman (BCR),
No. 27, 8th Cross, Nehru Street,
Tagore Nagar, Lawspet P.O,
Puducherry – 605 008.
17. Mr. P.K. Kamalanathan,
Retired Postal Assistant,
New No. 12, Old No. 10,
MRL Colony, 1st Street,
Sriram Nagar, Kodungaiyur,
Chennai – 600 118.
18. V. Seetharaman,
Retired Sub-Postmaster,
No. 247 E, Thirunavukkarasu Nagar,
Atur – 636 102.
19. P. Devaki,
Retired Assistant Postmaster,
Salem HO,
No. 54, Kailash Nagar,
Fair Lands,
Salem – 636 016.
20. A. Gunasekaran,
Retired Postal Assistant,
No. 60H/4 Rajaji Colony,
Atur – 636 102.
21. P. Nallamuthu,
Retired Postal Assistant,
Door No. 11, Jothi Mill Street,
Atur – 636 102.
22. R. Jayaraman,
Retired Postal Assistant,
Door No. 4/2, Iyer Street,
Kothampadi,
Pethanaickenpalayam – 636 109.
23. S. Sheik Usman,
Retired Postal Assistant,
No. 109/30/C,
New Kallanatham Road,
Mulluvadi Village,
Pudupet – 636 141.
-Vs-
1. Union of India,
Rep. by Chief Postmaster General,
Office of the Chief Postmaster General,
Chennai – 600 002.
2. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,
Chennai City North Division,
Chennai – 600 008.
3. The Senior Superintendent of Post Office,
Puducherry Division,
Puducherry – 605 001.
4. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices,
Salem East Division,
Salem – 636 001.
5. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Pollachi Division,
Pollachi – 642 001.
6. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Dindigul Division,
Dindigul – 624 001.
7. The Superintendent of Post Offices,
Cuddalore Division,
Cuddalore – 607 001. … Respondents
ORIGINAL APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ACT, 1985.
DETAILS OF THE APPLICATION
1. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE APPLICATION IS MADE.
i) Number of the order Memo No. C3/N/D.Sivagurunathan
ii) Date of the order 25.09.2017
iii) Subject in brief The Applicants seeks to set aside rejected Orders passed by the 2nd to 5th Respondents, rejecting Applicants claim for grant of Annual increments falls on 1st of July of the respective years. Consequently Applicants seek a direction from this Hon’ble Tribunal to direct the Respondents to re-fix their Pension and other terminal benefits after granting them their Annual increments which falls on 01st July of the year in which they retired from Departmental service including arrear of Pension and interest at the rate of 12% per annum till the date of actual payment.
2. JURISDICTION OF THE TRIBUNAL:
The applicant declares that the subject matter of this application is within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Tribunal.
3. LIMITATION:
The applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation period prescribed in Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985.
4. FACTS OF THE CASE:
a. Applicants submits that they are all retired Officials of Department of Posts. They retired from the Department at different point of time but uniformly as on 30th June of their retirement year. Applicants filed the present Original Application to set aside rejection Orders passed by the 2nd to 5th Respondents, rejecting their claim for grant of Annual increments which falls on 1stday of July of the respective retirement years. Further Applicants seek a direction from this Hon’ble Tribunal to direct the Respondents to re-fix their Pension and other terminal benefits after granting them their Annual increments which falls on 01st July of the year in which they retired from Departmental service including arrear of Pension and interest on arrears at the rate of 12% per annum till the date of actual payment.
b. Applicant submit that as per the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 annual increments payable to Central Government employees are quantified at the rate of 3% of the sum of the pay in the pay band and grade pay applicable. Such increments are allowed uniformly to all the Central Government employees as on 01st day July every year provided that they completed at least six months service from the last increments earned date. In the instant case, all the Applicant herein had worked for one full year before being retired from Departmental service on 30th June evening on attaining the age of Superannuation. But for the reason that they are no longer in employment in Central Government as on 01st of July in their respective superannuation year, they are denied Annual increments due to them at the rate of 3% of their pay in the pay band and grade pay.
c. While this being so, the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras, vide its Order dated 15.09.2017 in W.P. No. 15732 of 2017 (P. Ayyamperumal –Vs- The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras & Others) allowed the Writ Petition filed by a retired Central Government employee who retired on 30.06.2013. The Hon’ble Court directed the Central Government to grant him his Annual increments for his service between 01.07.2012 and 30.06.2013, although he no longer in employment as on 01.07.2013. A copy of the Orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.P. No. 15732 of 2017 (P. Ayyamperumal –Vs- The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras & Others) reported in CDJ 2017 MHC is enclosed asAnnexure A1.
d. Applicants submit that as against the above Orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras, Union of India filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 22283 of 2018. The Hon’ble Apex Court after hearing the Appellants therein and perusing the above referred Madras High Court Orders, dismissed the Special Leave Petition on 23.07.2018. A copy of the Orders passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 22283 of 2018 dated 23.07.2018 is enclosed as Annexure A2.Applicants submit that on perusal of the above referred Orders passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras as well as the Hon’ble Apex Court they submitted individual representations to the Respondents and sought to extend the benefits arises out of the above referred Judgments in their cases also by revising their Pension and other terminal benefits by including annual increments at the rate of 3% of their pay in the pay band and grade pay while calculating their Pension and other terminal benefits.
e. Applicants submit that after the perusal of the above mentioned representations submitted by them, Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 rejected such requests by passing the impugned Orders of rejection. Copies of the Applicants representations and rejection Orders passed by the Respondents dated 09.10.2018, 16.11.2018, 21.10.2018, 02.11.2018, 12.10.2018, 23.10.2018, 19.11.2018, 27.12.2018, 05.11.2018, 16.11.2018, 15.10.2018, 22.10.2018, 15.10.2018, 22.10.2018, 12.10.2018, 22.10.2018, 23.10.2018, 24.10.2018, 15.10.2018, 22.10.2018, 30.10.2018, 12.11.2018, 24.10.2018, 12.11.2018, 26.10.2018, 12.11.2018, 13.10.2018, 22.10.2018, 10.10.2018, 23.10.2018, 13.10.2018, 10.12.2018, 06.12.2018, 27.12.2018, 17.10.2018, 25.10.2018, 02.11.2018, 19.11.2018, 10.11.2018, 17.11.2018, 23.10.2018, 25.10.2018, 22.10.2018, 25.10.2018, 25.10.2018, 01.11.2018 are enclosed as Annexure A3 to A49.Applicants submits that the Respondents while rejecting the request for grant of Annual increments due to them in several impugned Orders acknowledges the Judgement passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.P. No. 15732 of 2017. But conveniently stated that the benefits of the Judgement related only to the individual concerned and cannot be extended to similarly placed persons like the Applicants herein.
f. It is appropriate here to mention that the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in the above referred Judgment does not restrict the operation of the Judgments to the Petitioner before it. If it had said so, then others like the Applicants herein, cannot have a claim to extend the benefit of that Judgments to their case. But that is not the facts in the present case. On the contrary Hon’ble High Court specifically decided the issue whether a Central Government Employee/Officer retiring on 30th June of their superannuating year is entitled for the increments falling on 01st July of the said year. After giving proper and sufficient justifications Hon’ble High Court allowed the case of the Petitioner by directing Union of India to grant him his Annual increments available to him at the time of his superannuation and consequently revise his pension and other terminal benefits.
g. Applicants submit that the reasoning of the Respondents to deny the benefits arises out of the Hon’ble Madras High Court Judgement in P. Ayyamperumal –Vs- The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras & Others is unjust and arbitrary especially when the said Judgment was confirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court vide its Order dated 23.07.2018. The Orders passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court dismissing the Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 22283 of 2018 may be summarized as follows:
“On the facts, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned Judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras.
The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.”
A perusal of the above Order of the Apex Court would reveal the fact that Hon’ble Apex Court had gone in to the facts of the case before it and after satisfying itself that the Orders passed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court does not merit interference proceeded to dismiss the Special Leave Petition filed by Union of India. Therefore Apex Court’s dismissal of the Special Leave Petition cannot be termed as a mere dismissal without examining the relevant facts of the case. On the contrary by passing such an Order the Hon’ble Apex Court upheld the Orders of the Madras High Court without any modifications.
Hence being left with no other alternative remedy Applicant approached this Hon’ble Tribunal on following among other grounds:
LEGAL GROUNDS
5.
a. The action of the Respondents in denying to extend the benefit arises out of Hon’ble Madras High Court Judgment inW.P. No. 15732 of 2017 (P. Ayyamperumal –Vs- The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras & Others) on the ground that the Judgement is only applicable to the individual Petitioner therein is unjust and arbitrary because the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras in the above referred Judgment does not restrict the operation of the Judgments to the Petitioner before it.
b. It is not fair on the part of the Respondent to deny the benefit arises out of Hon’ble Madras High Court Judgment inW.P. No. 15732 of 2017 (P. Ayyamperumal –Vs- The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras & Others) especially when the Special Leave Petition filed by the Union of India as against it was dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 23.07.2018.
c. it is not fair on the part of the Respondent to deny the benefit arises out of Hon’ble Madras High Court Judgment inW.P. No. 15732 of 2017 (P. Ayyamperumal –Vs- The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras & Others) especially when the Hon’ble Apex Court dismissed Union of India’s Special Leave Petition after it had gone in to the facts of the case before it and after satisfying itself that the Orders passed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court does not merit interference thereby approving the stand taken by the Hon’ble Madras High Court.
6. DETAILS OF REMEDIES EXHAUSTED:
There are no remedies available under the relevant service rules, for the relief prayed for herein.
7. MATTERS NOT PREVIOUSLY FILED OR PENDING WITH ANYOTHER COURT:
The applicant further declares that he has not previously filed any application, Writ Petition or Suit regarding the matter in respect of which this application has been made, before any Court of law or any other authority or any other bench of the Tribunal nor any such application, Writ Petition or Suit is pending before any of them.
8. FINAL RELIEF SOUGHT:
In these circumstances, the applicant pray that this Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to set aside Memo No.C3/N/Notional Increment on 1st July dated 16.11.2018, Memo No. C/Pay-misc/Dlgs/2018 dated 02.11.2018, Memo No. C10/Pen Genl/Dlgs dated 23.10.2018, Memo No.C3/N/Notional Increment on 1st July dated 27.12.2018, Memo No.C3/N/Notional Increment on 1st July dated 16.11.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 22.10.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 22.10.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 22.10.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 22.10.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 24.10.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 22.10.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 12.11.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 12.11.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 12.11.2018, Memo No. E2/PEN/INC/DLGS/DT AT POLLACHI dated 22.10.2018, Memo No. C10/Pen Genl/Dlgs dated 23.10.2018, Memo No. C PEN/DLGS/2018 dated 10.12.2018, Memo No. C3/N/Notional Increment on 1st July dated 27.12.2018, Memo No. BGT/SBK/dlgs dated 25.10.2018, Memo No. BGT/SBK/dlgs dated 19.11.2018, Memo No. BGT/SBK/dlgs dated 17.11.2018, Memo No. BGT/SBK/dlgs dated 25.10.2018, Memo No. BGT/SBK/dlgs dated 25.10.2018,Memo No. BGT/SBK/dlgs dated 01.11.2018, passed by the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7thRespondents respectively and consequently direct the Respondent to re-fix their Pension and other terminal benefits after granting them their Annual increments which falls on 01stJuly of the year in which they retired from Departmental service including arrear of Pension and interest on arrears at the rate of 12% per annum till the date of actual payment and pass such other orders as are necessary to meet the ends of justice.
9. INTERIM RELIEF SOUGHT:
NIL
10. NOT APPLICABLE:
11. PARTICULARS OF POSTAL ADDRESS:
• Number of Postal Order :
• Name of issuing Post Office : GPO, Chennai – 104
• Date of issuing Postal Order :
• Post Office at Which payable : GPO, Chennai – 104
12. LIST OF ENCLOSURES:
VERIFICATION
I, , son of , aged about years, residing at No. , do hereby verify that contents of 1 to 4 and 6 to 10 to be true on my personal knowledge and paragraph 5 is believed to be true on legal advice and that I have not suppressed any material fact.
Place : Chennai
Date :
Counsel for Applicant Signature of the Applicant
→
0 comments:
Post a Comment