HIGH COURT OF MADRAS - FAVOURABLE JUDGEMENT ON CEILING ON BONUS TO GDS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 25-10-2010
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ELIPE DHARMA RAO
And
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN
Writ Petition Nos.13056 and 13057 of 2010 and
M.P No. 1 of 2010 in W.P No.13056 of 2010 and
M.P No.2 of 2010 in W.P No.13057 of 2010
W.P No.13056 of 2010 :
(1).The Union of India
Rep. by Director General of Police
Department of Posts
Ministry of Communications & IT
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg
New Delhi
(2).Assistant Director General (Estt.)
Department of Posts
Ministry of Communications & IT
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg
New Delhi
(3).The Principal Chief Postmaster General
Tamil Nadu Circle
Anna Salai, Chennai
(4).The Postmaster General
Chennai City Region (TN)
Anna Salai, Chennai-2
(5).The Postmaster General
Central Region (TN)
Tiruchirapalli
(6).The Postmaster General
Western Region (TN)
Coimbatore
(7).The Postmaster General
Southern Region (TN)
Madurai
(8).The Postmaster General
Mail Motors
o/o the Chief Postmaster General
Tamilnadu Circle
Anna Salai, Chennai……. … … …Petitioners
Vs.
(1).The Registrar
Central Administrative Tribunal
Chennai
(2).All India Postal Extra Departmental Employees Union
(known as Gamin Dak Sevak)
Rep. by its Circle Secretary
John Britto, Chennai
(3).C.K Subramani
(4).B.Paranthaman.. … … …Respondents
W.P No.13057 of 2010:
(1).The Union of India
Rep. by Director General of Police
Department of Posts
Ministry of Communications & IT
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg
New Delhi
(2).Assistant Director General (Estt.)
Department of Posts
(Establishment Division)
Ministry of Communications & IT
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg
New Delhi
(3).The Principal Chief Postmaster General
Tamil Nadu Circle, Anna Salai
Chennai. … … …Petitioners
Vs.
(1).The Registrar
Central Administrative Tribunal
Chennai
(2).R.Dhanraj
(3).N.Vijayan. … .. … …Respondents
Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in O.A No.162 of 2009 and O.A No.186 of 2009 respectively on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench and quash the order dated 18-09-2009.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.M.G.Ramakkannan
For RR 2 – 4 : Mr.R Malaichamy
In W.P No.13056 of 2010
For RR 2 & 3 : Mr.K.M.Ramesh
In W.P No. 13057 of 2010
COMMON ORDER
(made by ELIPE DHARMARAO)
The Union of India has preferred the writ appeals against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dismissing the O.A Nos.162 and 186 of 2009, dated 18-09-2009.
2. The respondents / applicants filed the original applications to quash the order dated 09-02-2009 denying the claim of the applicants for productivity linked Bonus like other Central Government Employees from the year 2005-2006. The stand of the Union was that the Productivity Linked Bonus would be applicable only to regular Central Government Employees and not to Gramin Dak Sevak employees.
3. The Central Administrative Tribunal ( in short “the Tribunal”) by following the order passed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal dated 08-05-2009 in O.A No.256/PB/2009, wherein the same order dated 09-02-2009 was under challenge, allowed the Original Applications as prayed for. The said order is under challenge in the present Writ appeals.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners reiterated the contentions raised before the Tribunal. He would mainly contend that the respondents are not eligible for the Productivity Linked Bonus as they are not regular Central Government employees and they are Gramin Dak Sevak employees.
5. We have heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials on record.
6. A perusal of the impugned order would indicate that the order dated 09-02-2009, which was challenged before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai was also challenged before the Chandigarh Bench, Central Administrative Tribunal and the Chandigarh Bench, by following the decision of the Supreme Court reported in UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS V. KAMESWHAR PRASAD [1998 SCC (L&S) 447], quashed the order dated 09-02-2009 by observing that the applicants before the Tribunal are Government employees holding Civil posts under the Union and are entitled to protection of Article 311(2) like other Government employees. The Tribunal, by following the decision of the Chandigarh Bench, had allowed the Original Application.
7. Considering the fact that the order dated 09-02-2009, which was under challenge before the Tribunal was already quashed by Chandigarh Bench and no appeal has been preferred against the said order. We do not see any reason to entertain the present Writ Petitions.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Petitions are closed.
Sd.x.x.x.x.
Asst. Registrar
//true copy//
Sd.x.x.x.
To Sub Asst. Registrar
The Registrar
Central Administrative Tribunal
Chennai
1.CC to Mr.V.M.G.Ramakkannan, Advocate, SR.76976.
2.CC to Mr.K.M.Ramesh, Advocate, SR.76828.
3.CC to Mr.R.Malaichamy, Advocate, SR.76849.
No comments:
Post a Comment