CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1328/HR/2011
Order Reserved
on 23.04.2015
Pronounced on 28.04.2015
CORAM:
HON'BLE MRS. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER (A)
HON'BLE DR. BRAHM A. AGRAWAL, MEMBER (J)
1. All India Association of IPASP, Haryana Circle
through Circle Secretary Sh. Hira Lal son of Late Sh. Chandu Ram, age 47 years
working as ASPO(HQ) Kurukshetra.
2. Subash Chander son of Sh. Ram Dia, aged 41
years, ASPO Yamunanagar Postal Sub Division, Yamunanagar.
3. All India Association of IPASP, Punjab Circle
Headquarters, Chandigarh through Circle Secretary Hari Mohan son of Shri Kishan
Pal, aged 50 years, officiating as Deputy Divisional Manager, PLI, office of
Chief Post Master General, Punjab Circle, Chandigarh
4. Gopal Krishan son of Late Sh.S.Sharma Asstt.
Supdt. Post Offices, East Sub Division, Chandigarh.
... Applicants
Versus
1. Union of India through the Secretary to
Government of India, Ministry of Communications & Information
Technology, Department of Posts, New
Delhi.
2. The Chief Postmaster General, Punjab Circle,
Chandigarh.
3. The Chief Postmaster General, Haryana Circle,
Ambala.
Respondents
Present: Sh.
V.K. Sharma, counsel for the applicants.
Sh. Rohit Mittal, proxy for Sh. Rakesh Verma,
counsel for the respondents.
O R D E R
BY HON'BLE MRS. RAJWANT SANDHU, MEMBER (A)
1. This O.A. has been filed under Section 19 of the
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:
8(i) Quash the letter dated 3.10.2011 (Annexure
A-1) by which Limited Departmental Examination for Promotion to the cadre of
Sr. Postmaster (Gazetted) has been ordered to be held on 31.12.2011 which is
against the Department of Posts, Postal Supdts/Postmaster Group B Recruitment
Rules, 1987 as amended from time to time as there is no vacant post in the
quota prescribed under the rules.
ii. Quash the letter dated 29.11.2011 by which the
applicants have been informed that ASPO are not eligible for appearing in the
examination.
iii. Quash the Department of Posts, Senior
Postmaster (Group B Gazetted), Postmaster (Grade III and II-Group B non-Gazetted)
and Postmaster (Grade I-Group C Non-Gazetted) Recruitment Rules, 2010, Annexure
A-8 i.e Postmasters Cadre Rules, 2010 run contrary to the Postal Services
Postmaster Group B Rules, 1987 as amended from time to time, as the quota of
the Inspector Line, has also been reduced from 19% and 75% by carving out the
posts. There are also no vacant posts
under 75%, 19% and 6% quota.
iv. During the pendency of the OA, the operation of
the impugned order Annexure A-1 may be stayed.
v. Issue direction to the respondents to consider
the case of the members of the applicant No 1 Union and other applicants for
promotion under rules of 1987 in their quota and promote them from due date
with all the consequential benefits and it be declared that the bifurcation of
quota now carried out by the respondents is illegal, arbitrary and bereft of
any discernible principle.
2. It has been stated in the O.A. that the
applicants are an Association of the employees which is represented by their
Circle Secretary. Its members and applicant No. 2 and 4 are similarly situated
and common question of facts and law are involved in respect of all the
applicants and as such they have filed a Joint Original Application which may
be allowed in the interest of justice.
3. It has further been stated that there was a
cadre of Post Master, which was governed by the Postmaster Services Class II
(Recruitment) rules, 1975. Similarly, there was a cadre of Postal
Superintendents governed by the statutory set of rules equivalent to the Post Master
Services Class II Rules, 1975. In 1987
both these cadres were merged and governed by the rules know as Department of
Posts, Postal Superintendents/ Postmasters Group ‘B’ Recruitment Rules,
1987. In 1993 these rules were amended
and it was laid down that 75% of total posts would be filled by promotion from
amongst Inspector of Post Offices and Inspector of Railway Mail Service (Pay
scale of Rs.1400-2300) with 5 years of regular service in the grade. Copy of the Department of Posts, Postal
services Group ‘B’ Recruitment (Amendment) Rules, 1993 is appended as Annexure
A-3. Inspector Post Offices are further
promoted as ASPO and they formed one cadre. Since under the 1987 Rules, ASPOs
were not eligible to appear in the examination for promotion to the post of
Postal Services Group B, a clarification was issued on 23.8.1994 for making
ASPOs and HSG-I officials as eligible for appearing in the examination
(Annexure A-4). On the basis of these
rules in the cadre of postal Services Group B, total posts in the different
quotas were as under :
(a) 75%
quota 649
(b) 19%
quota 165
(c) 6% quota 52
TOTAL
866
4. On 3.2.2010, an order was issued by which it was
decided to constitute a separate cadre of Postmasters by carving them out from
the existing general line cadre posts and Postal Services Group B of Postal
Wing and to designate them as Senior Postmaster, Postmaster Grade III,
Postmaster Grade II and Postmaster Grade I.
On the basis of this a letter was issued on 22.11.2010 stating therein
that in the wake of introduction of technology, challenges from the market and
to increase productivity, it is absolutely essential to ensure that key post
offices are headed by the professional managers (Annexure A-5). In order to
ensure that professionally qualified, trained and meritorious officials held
the key post offices, it has been decided to introduce a separate cadre of
Postmasters. The posts were to be carved
out from the existing general line posts, instead the posts of Senior
Postmaster were carved out from the total strength of General line and
Inspector line. The number of Senior Postmasters posts has been calculated as
116. It was also mentioned in para 5 of
the letter dated 22.11.2010 that initial
constitution of various grades of Postmaster shall be done by inviting
options/applications from the existing incumbents of LSG, HSG II, HSG I in post
offices and Postal Services Group B.
Some of the members of the Association had been promoted in Postal
Services Group B and are awaiting promotion against 75% Quota. However, no
options were called from them being not eligible. Thereafter owing to fresh
notification dated 22.11.2010, none of the senior Inspectors/Asst Supdt Post
Offices, awaiting promotion for 649 posts (75% Quota) would be eligible for
opting as Senior Postmaster as 100% promotion to Senior Postmaster from
Inspector line officials is through Limited Departmental Competitive
Examination. From the letter dated 9.2.2011,
issued by the respondent no.2 it was clear that applications had been invited
only from the Postal Service Group B officials including Senior Postmaster
working on regular basis (Annexure A-6).
5. Total posts in Postal Group ‘B’ services under
75% quota, 19% quota and 6% quota are 866 and 116 posts have been carved out
from 866 posts meaning thereby that the quota has to be read keeping in view
the remaining posts, which are 750 if the 2010 rules are to be applied which
the applicants challenge. In case this was not so, the respondents would have
called options from the younger officials promoted and working in Postal Group
B services under 19% and 6% quota. This has been admitted by the respondents in
their letter dated 31.5.2010 when applicants sought information under the RTI
Act, after the issuance of the letter dated 3.2.2010 (Annexure A-7). On the
basis of this letter, the recruitment rules have been notified as Department of
Posts, Senior Postmaster (Group B Gazetted),
Postmaster (Grade III and II - Group B Non-Gazetted) and Postmaster
(Grade I, Group C non-Gazetted) Recruitment Rules, 2010 (Annexure A-8).
According to these rules, 25% of the posts of
senior Postmaster are required to be filled by promotion and 75% are to be
filled through Limited Departmental Competitive Examination in the following
manner:
“Promotion
25% Promotion:
Postmaster Grade-III in PB-2 of Rs.9300-34800 and
Grade pay of Rs.4600/- with two years regular service in the grade (including
regular service in Higher Selection Grade-I, if any).
75% promotion (through Limited Departmental
Competitive Examination):
Inspectors of Posts in P-2 of Rs.9300-34800 and
Grade pay of Rs.4200/- with six years, regular service in the grade after
qualifying a Limited Departmental Competitive Examination.
6. In the grounds for relief it has, inter alia,
been stated as follows:
(i) It is well settled law that one can be promoted
in his own quota and vacancies of one quota cannot be diverted to another
quota. Under the 1987 rules as amended
in 1993 there is no Departmental Examination for filling the 75% posts but so
far all posts of PSS Group B have been filled up through competitive
examination. This is because of defective policy of introducing examination for
promotion to PSS Group B through competitive examination and not
maintaining representation roster for 19%, 6% and 75%.
(ii) For all recruitments representation roster is
being maintained to fill the reserved vacancies. Neither representation can
exceed the total percentage nor can it be replaced by any other point. As such
75% means filling 75% on the total strength and not vacancies that occur in a
particular year. Application of the percentage of reservation through the
vacancy based roster was called in question in various cases including in the
celebrated case of R.K. Sabharwal Versus State of Punjab, wherein it has been
held that reservation of jobs should apply to posts and not to vacancies. There is every apprehension that the
examination for 75% vacancies is being conducted without calculating the posts
under the quota as there is no vacant post in either quota of PSS group B.
(iii) The calculation of vacancies in the present
manner is even against the principles of natural justice because reservation in
promotion by seniority subject to fitness was introduced in 1972, subject to
some conditions. In 1974, reservations in promotion by selection from C to B
within B and from B to the lowest rung of Group A were introduced providing the
element of direct recruitment does not exceed 50%. Contrary to this, in the
notification dated 22.11.2010, all 87 posts (75% of 116) earmarked for Senior
Postmaster are ordered to be filled through examination. Instead these should
be part of 19% roster meant for Limited Departmental Competitive
Examination. Thus, the action of
respondents stand vitiated.
(iv) The respondents are liable to be directed to
identify 75% of 116 posts (87 posts) of Sr. Postmaster for filling up through
the competitive examination and recast the roster for different stream i.e.19%,
6%, keeping intact the seniority cum fitness quota amongst Inspector Posts cadre
to the extent of 649 posts out of 866 posts of PSS Group B. Only those posts
which fall vacant owing to retirement, promotion, resignation, death etc. under
19% and 6 % quota should be filled through examination. Otherwise all the 100%
post will be occupied by the officials coming through examination and the
experienced Inspector Post cadre official will be ignored and deprived of
promotional avenue resulting in frustration due to stagnation, and will mar
efficiency in the cadre, which will be arbitrary, irrational and
discriminatory.
(v) Otherwise also in this examination, according
to the rules of 2010, Asstt. Supdt Post Offices is not eligible to appear in
the examination for promotion to the post of Sr. Post Master particularly when
the post of Asstt. Supdts of Post Offices and Inspectors of Post Offices form
one cadre and are in common seniority list and both the posts come under PB-2
of Rs.9300-34800/- with difference in Grade Pay only. Inspectors are in the
grade pay of Rs.4200/- whereas the ASPOs are in the grade pay of Rs.4600/-.
Since under the 1987 rules read with clarification of 1994, ASPOs were made
eligible for appearing in the examination for promotion to PSS Group B, no
justification is there to debar the ASPOs for appearing in the examination if
the rules of 2010 are to be applied which cannot be applied unless the rules of
1987 are amended.
7. Written statement on behalf of the respondents
was initially filed on 07.05.2012 wherein it has been stated that the
Department of Posts issued orders creating Postmaster cadre consisting of
Postmaster Grade-I, Grade-II & III and Sr. Postmasters (Gazetted) in
exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the
Constitution. The rules regulating the method of recruitment to the posts of
Sr. Postmasters Gr-B (Gazetted) were promulgated vide notification
no.137-03/2009-SPB-II dated 09.09.2010 (Annexure R-1). As per the notified statutory Recruitment
Rules for Sr. Postmasters (116 numbers), are to be filled by the following methods:
(i) 25% of posts from Postmaster Gr.III in PB-2 of
Rs.9300-34800 with grade pay of Rs.4600 with two years regular service.
(ii) 75% of posts by promotion through Limited
Competitive Departmental Examination and according to Item No.12 of the RRs
Inspector of Posts in PB-2 of Rs.9300-34800 and Grade Pay of Rs.4200 with
six years regular service after qualifying a Limited Departmental Competitive
Examination.
The Department of Posts issued a notification on
03.10.2011 for holding the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination for
promotion to the cadre of Sr. Postmasters (Gazetted) on 31.12.2011 from amongst
eligible candidates. The ASPs who are in
the Gr. B gazetted status in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 are not eligible and
their applications for appearing in the LDCE were not considered. The applicant no.3 previously filed OA
No.399/PB/2011 on the same issue but while pronouncing the order on 26.05.2011,
this Tribunal did not give its finding on the relief. The applicants through this OA are making one
more attempt.
8. Amended written statement was filed on behalf of
the respondents on 18.02.2013 wherein it
has been stated that the present OA is not maintainable because the Rules
regulating the method of recruitment to the post of Senior Post Master Grade-B
(Gazetted) were promulgated under Article 309 of the Constitution of India vide
notification No.137-03/2009-SPB-II dated 09.09.2010. Accordingly to Recruitment Rules of Sr.
Postmaster (Gazetted), 25% of the posts are to be filled from General Line
Officials through DPC, while 75% of the posts are to be filled from Inspector
Post Line Officials through a Limited Departmental Competitive
Examination. Further, according to item
12 of Recruitment Rules, 25% of the posts to be filled from General Line
Officials are through Postmaster Grade-III in PB-2 of Rs.9300-34800 with Grade
Pay of Rs.4600/- with two years regular service in the Grade (including regular
service in HSG-I), while 75% of the posts to be filled from Inspector Post Line
are from Inspector of Posts officials in PB-2 of Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay
of Rs.4200/- with six years regular service.
9. In order to fill the posts of Sr. Postmaster, a
notification dated 03.10.2011 for holding the Limited Departmental Competitive
Examination for promotion to the cadre of Sr. Postmaster (Gazetted) was
issued. Since the Asstt. Supdt. Posts
working in Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- have been conferred ‘Gazetted Status’ but not
given Group-B, therefore, these were not made eligible in the aforesaid
examination, also as per the RRs. As per
the Recruitment Rules, only Inspector Post Officials having six years of
regular service in PB-2 of Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- are
eligible to appear in the LDCE. LDCE
examination was later on postponed till further orders. Hence, in view thereof, the present OA
deserves dismissal as no cause of action has accrued to the applicants.
10. It has also been mentioned in the written
statement that total number of posts apportioned to IPO Line and General line after
amendment of existing RRs of Postal Superintendent Gr.B remains to be settled
and to this extent O.A. is premature.
11. Arguments advanced by learned counsel for the
parties were heard when learned counsel for the applicant reiterated the facts
and grounds taken in the O.A. He stated
that as per the 1987 Rules, the number of posts of Superintendent/Postmaster
Gr. B Service Recruitment Rules mentioned therein was 790 and this figure could
not have been varied without there being amendment of the Rules. Hence action of the respondents in taking
away 116 posts from this cadre and designating these as Senior Postmaster was
highly irregular. He stated that the
LDCE examination for promotion to the cadre of Senior Postmaster (Gazetted)
could not be held as notified vide letter dated 03.10.2011 (Annexure A-1),
since there was no mention therein of the number of posts to be filled through
this examination. The respondents had
themselves stated in response to a RTI application that there were no vacancies
available in the Group B cadre. Hence it
was not understood as to why the LDCE was proposed to be held. He also stated that relief clause 8(ii) had
been rendered infructuous and he was not pressing for the same.
12. Learned counsel for the respondents stated that
the Senior Post Master Group B Gazetted, Postmaster Grade III and II Group
B non-Gazetted and Postmaster Grade I-Group C non-Gazetted Recruitment Rules,
2010 had been promulgated in exercise of powers conferred by the proviso to
Article 309 of the Constitution of India and the applicants could not challenge
the same. It was for the Department to
decide on the number of posts to be apportioned to each category keeping in
view work load, the nature of duties and other aspects and hence there was no
merit in this O.A.
13. We have given our careful consideration to the
matter. The claim made in the O.A. that
the promotion to the posts notified by the Postal Department should continue
under the Rules of 1987, is clearly unreasonable since the department has
notified the Department of Posts, Senior Post Master (Group B Gazetted),
Postmaster (Grade III and II-Group B non-Gazetted) and Postmaster (Grade I,
Group C non-Gazetted) Recruitment Rules, 2010 on 09.09.2010. Therefore, any selection to these posts after
the September 2010 has to take place in accordance with these Rules. Moreover, through the circular dated
03.10.2011, the applications were invited for LDCE for the post of Senior
Postmaster (Gazetted) and Rules for these posts had only notified on
09.09.2010. The O.A. is therefore held
to be without merit and is dismissed.
MEMBER (J) MEMBER (A)
Place: Chandigarh.
Dated:28.04.2015
