SUNITA GUPTA J.

1. The impugned order dated 21st November, 2014 passed by the Principal Bench, Central Administrative Tribunal (“Tribunal” for short) in OA No. 3870/2013 and order dated 3rd February, 2015 passed in review application being RA 15/2015 rejecting the claim for grant of “arrears of paid weekly off” to the petitioner during the period she worked as casual labourer with temporary status are under challenge in this writ petition.

2. The petitioner was initially engaged as a casual labourer on daily wage basis on 1st October, 1988 by respondent No. 4. She was conferred with temporary status with effect from 15th September, 1994 in accordance with the scheme appended to the DOP&Ts O.M. dated 10th September, 1993 vide order dated 15th September, 1994 issued by the respondent No. 4 before us. Thereafter she was appointed as safai karmchari on regular basis with effect from 13th June, 2005 vide order dated 9th June, 2005.

3. The petitioner had filed the OA No.3870/2013 claiming the following reliefs:

(a) To direct the respondents to grant all the envisaged benefits as per OM dated 07.06.1988 as well and para 5 of the DOPT schemes of 10.9.1993 for payment of paid weekly off and grant of increments on fixation of pay on accord of Regularization and benefit of earned leave on credit of the applicant to be brought forward on her regularization.

(b) Make payment of all arrears of benefits as is granted to other similarly situated employees with refund of any amount irregularly deducted under the guise of the New Pension Scheme applicability along with interest 18% p.a. simple interest on all the arrears due to the applicant from the date fell as such till date of payment made.

(c) To pass any order or directions as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case with Award of cost of this application.”

4. By order dated 21st November, 2014, the Tribunal allowed the claim of the petitioner regarding the arrears admissible to her on account of paid weekly off during the period when she worked as casual labourer in accordance with DOP&Ts O.M. dated 7th June, 1988 and also directed the respondent to decide the question of grant of increments to the petitioner at the time of fixation of her pay and to carry forward the leave earned by her while working as casual labourer with temporary status to the leave account on her regular appointment. However, the Tribunal declined to grant her relief regarding paid weekly off during the period when she worked as a casual labourer with temporary status. Review application filed by her also met with the same fate. Feeling aggrieved by this part of the order, present writ petition has been filed by her.

5. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the Tribunal wrongly interpreted the object and intent of two OMs. While O.M. dated 7th June, 1988 is of permanent nature, the O.M. dated 10th September, 1993 is of one time applicability. Learned counsel laid emphasis on the clause “while the existing guidelines contained in O.M. dated 7th June, 1988 may continue to be followed” occurring in paragraph 1 of DOP&Ts O.M. dated 10th September, 1993 and submitted that in view of the said clause, sub paragraph (vi) of paragraph 1 of the O.M. dated 7th June, 1988 is applicable to casual labourer with temporary status entitling them to paid weekly off, in addition to the benefits specified in paragraph 5 of the O.M. dated 10th September, 1993 and thus the petitioner is entitled to be paid arrears on account of paid weekly off during the period when she was working as a casual labourer with temporary status.

6. The learned counsel further submits that payment is made to other similarly situated employees on account of paid weekly off and denial of such monetary benefit to the petitioner is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. For raising this sub