O.A. No. 234 of 2005. Case: Krishna Dey Vs Union of India (UOI) and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal
| Case Number | O.A. No. 234 of 2005 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: J.K. Karn and H.K. Karn, Advs. and For Respondents: M.D. Dwivedi, ASC. |
| Judges | P.K. Sinha, J. (Vice Chairman) and Mantreshwar Jha, Member (A) |
| Issue | Central Civil Services (Pension) Act - Sections 3(1); Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules - Rules 13, 54, 54(12) and 2311(3); Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 - Rule 10 and 10(2); Constitution of India - Article 14 |
| Citation | 2006 (1) SLJ 201 (CAT) |
| Judgement Date | October 03, 2005 |
| Court | Central Administrative Tribunal |
Judgment:
P.K. Sinha, J. (Vice Chairman), (Patna Bench)
-
The applicant is widow of Late Man Mohan Dey who was appointed as casual labourer in the Postal Department on 04.04.1983 and, having worked as such continuously, he was granted temporary status w.e.f. 29.11.1989 but, as the ill fate would have it, he died in harness on 11.02.1999, still working under temporary status. There is no dispute about the aforesaid facts.
-
The applicant claims that thereafter the respondents sent her form under Rule 54(12) of the CCS (Pension) Rules for being filled up which fact however has been denied in the written statement. The claim of the applicant was that she was paid neither gratuity, nor family pension despite requests rather, without paying her anything, areceipt for Rs. 15,000 was taken, which the respondents say was taken for payment of CGEIS which amount was paid.
Judgment in O.A. 339 of 2004 has been annexed at Annexure-A/5 granting similar relief to another similarly situated applicant, which fact is admitted in the written statement.
-
The applicant claims that a sum of Rs. 2712 which was payable to her on account of bonus and LTA admissible to her deceased husband, was wrongly withheld by the respondents who further asked her to pay a sum of Rs. 33,431 which they claim was on account of over payment of wages to her deceased husband. This has been admitted by the respondents in Paragraphs 2 and 17 of the written statement claiming therein that the aforesaid amount had remained due after adjusting the amount of bonus and LTA as a total of Rs. 36,143 was subsequently found to have been over paid to the deceased employee while he was working under the department. The payment of family pension and other terminal benefits was rejected by the respondents by Annexure-A/7, dated 10.01.2005 which is the speaking order passed on account of an order passed by this Tribunal in O.A. 339 of 2004 (Annexure-A/5) filed earlier by the same applicant, whereunder the matter was remitted back to the respondents, without giving a definite finding, to consider the matter and to record a speaking order.
-
This application thereafter was filed seeking relief to quash Annexure-A/6 by which, as stated above, the applicant was asked to repay the over paid amount of Rs. 33,431, as also to quash Annexure-A/7 whereunder the claim of the applicant for payment of family pension and DCRG had been rejected, with further prayer to direct the respondents to pay family pension to the applicant, arrears with interest.
In course of arguments the learned Counsel for the applicant has pressed the claims of the applicant to be paid family pension to her and not to recover any amount from her, hence these are the twin claims which are being examined under this order.
-
The respondents have rejected the claim of family pension on account of a circular letter dated 30.11.1992, bearing No. DG (Posts) No. 66-9/91-SPB-I which is annexured as Annexure-A/2 as well at Annexure-R/2 (to the written statement). This circular runs as follows:
-
Benefits to casual labourers on completion of three years service in temporary status--In their judgment, dated 29.11.1989, the Hon'ble Supreme Court have held that after rendering three years of continuous service with temporary status, the casual labourers shall be treated at par with temporary Group 'D' employees of the Department of Posts and would thereby be entitled to such benefits as are admissible to Group 'D' employee on regular basis.
-
In compliance with the above said directive of the Hon'ble Supreme Court it has been decided that the casual labourers of this department conferred with temporary status as per the scheme circulated in the above said circular No. 45-95/87-SPB-I, dated 12.04.1991, be treated at par with temporary Group 'D' employees with effect from the date they complete three years of service in the newly acquired temporary status as per the above said scheme. From that date they will be entitled to benefits admissible to temporary Group 'D' employees such as:
(1) All kinds of leave admissible to temporary employees;
(2) Holidays as admissible to regular employees;
(3) Counting of service for the purpose of pension and terminal benefits as in the case of temporary employees appointed on regular basis for those temporary employees who are given temporary status and who complete three years of service in that status while granting them pension and retirement benefits after their regularisation;
(4) Central Government Employees' Insurance Scheme;
(5) General Provident Fund;
(6) Medical Aid;
(7) Leave Travel Concession;
(8) All advances admissible to temporary Group 'D' employees;
(9) Bonus.
-
Further action may be taken accordingly and proper service record of such employees may also be maintained.
-
The argument is that as per Clause 2(3) of this circular letter the counting of service for the purpose of pension and terminal benefits is for those temporary employees who are given temporary status and who complete three years of service in that status, while granting them pension and retirement benefits after their regularisation later, which employees alone would be entitled to the benefits admissible to temporary Group 'D' employees. It was submitted that the period of service under temporary status could be counted for...
To continue reading
Request your trial