IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31522 of 2008(S) -------------------------- OA.132/2007 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER: --------------- P.SUGESH, S/O.M.CHANDRASHEKHARA MENON, AGED 43 YEARS, MAILMAN, SRO, RMS, PALAKKAD, RESIDING AT HARITHA, NEDUVAKKODU, KALAM, KANISSERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ SRI.SURAJ.S SRI.P.A.KUMARAN SMT.VINEETHA B. RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT, RMS CT DIVISION, CALICUT 678 002. 2. CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL, KERALA CIRCLE TRIVANDRUM. 3. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, NEW DELHI. ADV. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN CGC FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.31522 OF 2008 S ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner is the applicant in O.A.No.132/2007 before the CAT, Ernakulam Bench. He was appointed as Extra Departmental Mailman on 16.1.1985. In 1991, he joined the Army Postal Service on deputation. To enable his deputation to Group D Cadre, the petitioner was promoted on adhoc basis as Group D employee in his parent department. While he was promoted as Group D employee in his parent department on adhoc basis, he gave the following declaration. “ I, No.8373126.Y Rank R/SEP Name SUGHESH P. EDA on my free will agree to the following conditions in connection with my temporary appointment as Group'D' for the purpose of deputation to APS: 1. My appointment as Group D is purely technical to enable my deputation to the APS. 2. I will be entitled for appointment as a regular Group D only when my turn comes for the same as per seniority. 3. In case I seek repatriation from the APS, W.P.(C)No.31522/08 -2- if at that time my turn has not come for appointment as Group D, I will be taken back in the civil only as EDA and that for this also I will be prepared to wait till the next vacancy occurs. My appointment as EDA may not also be at the same place where I was working at the time of my deputation to the APS. 4. On repatriation my pay in the civil will be refixed with reference to the pay of my immediate junior in the civil at the lower stage. 5. I will not be eligible to appear in the examination for promotion as PAs/SAs till my junior in the civil Group'D' becomes eligible for the same. 6. My service as Group D for the purpose of TBOP will count only from the date my immediate junior is appointed as Group 'D'.” While working in the Army Postal Service, he enjoyed all the benefits available to an incumbent in that post including increment and revision of pay. While so, he was repatriated to the parent department on 1.1.2006. In the meantime, his turn arose in the parent department for promotion to Group D and he was promoted to that post on 12.4.2005. Later, he was posted in Group D on 13.1.2006. On his rejoining the parent W.P.(C)No.31522/08 -3- department, dispute arose between the petitioner and the respondents regarding the fixation of pay. He claimed that the service rendered by him in the Army Postal Service should also be counted for the purpose of fixation of pay and for pensionary benefits. His representation claiming the above relief was rejected by the competent authority. Exhibit P7 was the representation of the petitioner, which was rejected by Exhibit P8. The writ petitioner moved the CAT, challenging Exhibit P8 and seeking consequential reliefs. The CAT held that the petitioner is not entitled to count the service rendered by him in the Army Postal Service for the purpose of increments and fixation of pay. He could get that benefit only with effect from the date when his turn arose in the parent department for regular promotion. The petitioner submits that though, he raised a claim that the said service should be counted for the purpose of pensionary benefits, that point was not at all considered by the CAT. 2. We heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents also. 3. Going by the tone and tenor of the declaration made W.P.(C)No.31522/08 -4- by the petitioner, he cannot get any additional benefit which his senior in service could not get. He was promoted on adhoc basis to post him on deputation to Army Postal Service subject to certain conditions and those conditions were unconditionally accepted, by giving a declaration by the petitioner, which we have already quoted above. So, the view taken by the Tribunal that the petitioner is entitled to get increment and fixation of pay, having regard only to his regular promotion to Group D post in the parent department cannot be said to be illegal or perverse. Paragraph 4 of the undertaking squarely supports the stand taken by the respondents. The respondents further pointed out that he will draw the first increment in the Postal Department in Group D post with effect from 1.4.2006. We find nothing wrong with the decision of the CAT. The contentions raised by the petitioner relying on Rule 22 of the Fundamental Rules are plainly untenable. 4. If the petitioner is entitled to have the GDS service counted for pension, till he was regularly promoted to Group D in the postal department in 2005 as per the existing rules, then he can claim counting of the services rendered by him in the Army W.P.(C)No.31522/08 -5- Postal Service. In the absence of any such claim, we feel that the petitioner cannot steal a march over his seniors in any manner including in the matter of pensionary benefits. The declaration given by him bars him from making any such plea. In the result, the Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn