Writ Petition No. 11679 of 2011 (S-CAT). Case: The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices and Ors. Vs Anthony Steven. High Court of Karnataka (India)
| Case Number | Writ Petition No. 11679 of 2011 (S-CAT) |
| Counsel | For Appellant: C. Shashikantha, Adv. and For Respondents: Basavaraj Veerabhadra, Adv. |
| Judges | K. L. Manjunath and Raghvendra S. Chauhan, JJ. |
| Issue | Service Law |
| Judgement Date | April 07, 2015 |
| Court | High Court of Karnataka (India) |
Order:
Raghvendra S. Chauhan, J.
-
The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 2-12-2010, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench, Bengaluru, in O.S. No. 494/2009. By the impugned order, the learned Tribunal has allowed the Original Application filed by the respondent, Mr. Anthony Steven, and has directed the petitioners to treat the respondent as entitled to the pensionary benefits under old Pensionary Rules, 1972 from the date when he was granted the casual labour temporary status, to discontinue recovery of contribution under the new scheme, and to refund the recovery so far, if any, towards pension.
-
The brief facts of the case are that Mr. Anthony Steven entered into the service of Postal Department as a contingent night watchman Madiwala S.O. a/w Jayanagar H.O. vide ASP i/c Bangalore South Sub-Division II Order No. B2/Cont-Emp/Dlgs/88-89 dated 8-9-1988 read with SSPOs, Bangalore South Division, Bangalore-560041 memo No. A2/10 dated 18-7-1988, w.e.f. 11-7-1998. The contention of the petitioner Department is that the casual labours were hired and after fulfilling some conditions, they were given temporary Group D status. Thereafter, fulfilling of some further conditions, including condition for work in temporary status of three years, they were given permanent Group D Status. According to Mr. Anthony Steven, since he had joined the Department on 29-11-1989, he was entitled to be given a temporary status after completing his three years, i.e. on 29-11-1992; three years after that, he would have become entitled to permanent status in Group D. He was conferred with permanent status with effect from 29-11-1989 by order dated 26-7-1994. By the said order, he was given certain benefits which include pension and retirement benefits after regularisation. His service in Group D was regularised on 17-4-2006. However, because of the pathetic inefficiency of the Department, he was not given permanent status till 26-4-2006.
-
Since the benefits of increments while working as a temporary status Group D employee were denied to him, he filed an Original Application, namely O.A. No. 221/2008 before the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru. By order dated 7-11-2008, the learned Tribunal directed the petitioners to fix his pay and allowances.
-
For the purpose of this case it is pertinent to note that initially all the employees were covered under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Under the said Rules, while the employees contributed towards the Central Provident Fund, the Central Government also contributed the same amount towards the fund. This Scheme was equally applicable to those who were...
To continue reading
Request your trial