O.As. Nos. 85 and 90 of 2011. Case: 1. Bhaskaran P.N., Aged 39 years, S/o. Nallambira, Officiating Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Carrier, Puthupadi Sub Post Office, Eangapuzha, Calicut District, Residing at : Kanjamvayal, Puthupadi PO, Eangapuzha, Calicut-673586, 2. Preetha E., Part time contingent employee, Chelakara Post Office, Thrissur Vs 1. Union of India, represented by Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Communication, Department of Posts, New Delhi - 110001 and Inspector of Posts, Kunnamangalam Sub Division, Kunnamangalam, Calicut-673571, 2. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Thrissur Division, Thrissur-680001 and The Postmaster General, Central Region, Kochi-682018. Central Administrative Tribunal
| Case Number | O.As. Nos. 85 and 90 of 2011 |
| Judges | Mr. P.R. Raman, Judicial Member and Mr. K. George Joseph, Administrative Member |
| Issue | Service Law |
| Judgement Date | March 13, 2012 |
| Court | Central Administrative Tribunal |
Order:
Mr. K. George Joseph, Administrative Member, (Ernakulam Bench)
1. In the above O.As, the issue to be adjudicated is whether the applicants are eligible for preference in the matter of appointment as Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Carrier (GDSMC) or Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Postmaster (GDSBPM), as the case may be. Hence, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. The applicants contend that they are fully qualified for the post of GDSMC / GDSBPM. Since 2001, they have worked as casual laborers and are entitled for the benefit of preference for appointment as GDS. They relied on the letter of Director General, Department of Posts, New Delhi, No. 17-141/88/ EDC & Training dated 6.6.1988, which is reproduced as under:
DG Posts Letter No.17-141/88-EDC & Trg. dated the 6th June, 1988:-
Sub: Preference to casual laborers in the matter of appointment as ED Agents.
According to the prevalent Recruitment Rules governing the cadre of Group 'D', the order of preference among various segments of eligible employees is as under:-
(a) Non test category
(b) ED employees
(c) Casual laborers
(d) Part time casual laborers.
2. Since the number of vacancies of Group 'D' is limited and the number of ED employees eligible for recruitment as Group 'D' is comparatively large, the casual laborers and part time casual laborers hardly get any chance of their being absorbed as Group 'D'. Thus majority of casual laborers with long service as left out without any prospect of their getting absorbed in Group 'D' cadre.
3. Keeping the above in view, a suggestion has been put forth that casual laborers, both full and part time should be given preference for recruitment as Extra Departmental Agents, in case they are willing, with a view to afford the casual laborers a chance for ultimate absorption as Group 'D'.
4. The suggestion has been examined in detail and it has been decided that casual laborers, whether full time or part time, who are willing to be appointed to ED vacancies may be given preference in the matter of recruitment to ED posts, provided they fulfill all the conditions and have put in a minimum service of one year. For this purpose, a service of 240 days in a year may be reckoned as one year's service. It should be ensured that nominations are called for from Employment Exchange to fill up the vacancies of casual laborers so that ultimately the casual laborers who are considered for ED vacancies have initially been sponsored by Employment Exchange.
2. The respondents in their reply statement submitted that the applicants could not produce any evidence to show that they are casual laborers engaged by the department in accordance with due procedure. They were engaged for a few hours in a Post Office for certain duties, but that was without reference to the Employment Exchange. Relying on the decision of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 527/2006, they contended that the applicants have no right to be considered in preference to others.
3. We have heard Mr. T.C. Govindaswamy and Mr. Vishnu S. Chempazhanthiyil, learned counsel for the applicants and Ms. Deepti Mary Varghese, and Mr. M.K. Aboobacker, learned ACGSCs appearing for the respondents in the respective O.As and perused the records.
4. In a number of cases, this Tribunal has held that the casual employees of any type on fulfilling the conditions in the letter of DG Posts dated 06.06.1988 (supra), are eligible for preference in the matter of appointment as GDS, even if they have not been sponsored by the Employment Exchange. The orders of this Tribunal have been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala. In O.A. No. 109/2010, this Tribunal held as under:
7. It is amply clear that the casual laborers whether full time or part time are eligible for preference in the matter of recruitment to ED posts if they fulfill all the conditions and have put in a minimum...
To continue reading
Request your trial