Sudhir Singh, J. –

Re. I.A.No. 2 of 2025

The aforesaid interlocutory application has been pressed for condoning the delay of 59 days in preferring this writ application.

2. For the reasons stated in the interlocutory application, the delay is condoned.

3. Interlocutory Application No. 02/2025 stands allowed.

Re.: CWJC No. 8513 of 2025

The present writ application has been preferred against the order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench (for brevity the ‘Tribunal’) in OA No. 050/0743/2023 whereby the Tribunal has allowed the original application preferred by the respondent herein and directed grant of pension and retiral benefits to her.

2. The brief facts giving rise to the present writ application are that respondent herein joined as ‘Contingency Paid Waterwoman’ on 09.03.1982 in the Department of Posts at Bankipore Head Post Office. Subsequently, by order dated 13.06.2000, issued by the then Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Patna Division, she was conferred temporary status as a casual labourer w.e.f. 01.06.2000. In terms of G.I. Department of Posts Letter dated 30.11.1992 (Lr. No. 66-9-91 SPB-I), the respondent, after rendering three years of continuous service, became entitled to such benefits as are admissible to Group-D employees on regular basis w.e.f. 02.06.2003. The respondent was extended all benefits except grant of MACP, though she claimed that she was entitled to be given 1st MACP w.e.f. 02.06.2013 whereas other similarly situated employees were given such benefits. Thereafter, vide letter dated 30.08.2013 of the Senior Postmaster, Bankipore, Head Office, Patna, the respondent submitted her willingness to be regularised on 02.09.2013, which remained pending without any justification, denying her the benefits after regularisation of service. She retired from the service after rendering more than 39 years of continuous service on 30.09.2021.

3. Being aggrieved, the respondent filed O.A. No. 523 of 2016 before the learned Tribunal for her regularisation in service, which was stood disposed of by order dated 07.01.2020, directing the Department to take a decision regarding regularisation of the services of the applicant/respondent and to inform her by a speaking order within three months from the date of receipt of the said order. Thereupon, after examining the claim of the applicant/respondent, the Department passed order dated 27.01.2020, whereby the claim of the applicant/respondent, regarding regularisation, was postponed and kept pending due to non-availability of MTS posts. The petitioners did not grant pensionary benefits and other benefits under MACP to the respondent upon her retirement as she was not regularised.

4. The said order dated 27.01.2020 of the Department, was challenged by the respondent before the Tribunal in the current OA No. 050/0743/2023, which was allowed on 03.09.2024, holding that the applicant/respondent is entitled for pension and the Department was directed to settle the pension and all other retiral benefits and to pay the arrears within a period of three months from the date of production/receipt of order passed today, with interest @ 8% per annum from the date of entitlement, failing which the interest shall be paid @ 9% per annum from the date of entitlement till final payment. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid order of the Tribunal dated 03.09.2024, the Department of Posts has preferred the present writ application.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent was appointed on a temporary status and hence, she cannot claim pensionary benefits. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that no pensionary benefit, as defined under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 (now CCS Pension Rules, 2021), is payable to the respondent employee. The learned counsel further submitted that the respondent was treated at par with temporary Group ‘D’ employees w.e.f. 01.06.2003, to the extent of some benefits admissible to Gr