The Court emphasized the importance of following the principles of natural justice and the legal provisions outlined in the GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011 in cases of termination.

JUDGMENT

S. Muralidhar, J. - The Petitioners have filed the present petition challenging an order dated 30th August, 2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi ("CAT") in OA No.2910 of 2015 rejecting the prayer of the Petitioners for declaring the separate orders dated 24th June, 2015 terminating their services as Gramin Dak Sewak, Branch Post Master ["GDS, BPM"] as illegal.

2. It must be mentioned here that pursuant to an advertisement issued on 5th March, 2014 by the Senior Superintendent of Post ("SSP"), Aligarh Division for filling up the substantive vacancies of GDS, BPM, the Petitioners applied and qualified in the selection. The Petitioners were included in the list of selected candidates and were issued engagement orders stating that they had been engaged as GDS, BPM. However, the appointment was stated to be on contract basis without specifying any time schedule.

3. In a judgment dated 9th December, 2014 in WP(C) 17 of 2009 (Vinod Kumar Saxena v. Union of India & Ors.) the Supreme Court held that the Petitioners were holders of civil posts and on that basis, they could approach the CAT to agitate their grievance.

4. After the Petitioners joined their respective posts, all of a sudden on 24th June, 2015 separate orders were issued terminating the services of each of the Petitioners. The orders, which were identically worded, read as under:

"In pursuance of the proviso to Rule 8 and the Note below Rule 8 of GDS (Conduct & Engagement) Rules, 2011, I Vinod Kumar Gupta Senior Superintendent of Post Offices Aligarh Division Aligarh, hereby terminate the services of Shri Vishnu Kumar GDS BPM Kapsiya B.O. in account with Sikandra Rau Hathras with immediate effect and direct that he/ she shall be entitled to a sum equivalent to the amount of his basic TRCA plus dearness allowance for the period of notice at the same rates at which he/she was drawing them immediately before the termination of his engagement. The due amount of TRCA plus dearness allowance is being remitted through Money Order in lieu of the notice of one month."

5. On 1st July, 2015 the Petitioners filed OA No. 2910 of 2015 in the CAT challenging the above termination orders. On 15th September, 2015 the Respondents filed a reply in which inter alia reference was made to a complaint dated 25th January, 2015 received from an Ex Member of Parliament ("MP") Chaudhary Vijendra Singh regarding the irregular working of the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Aligarh in the matter of engaging GDS, BPM in the Aligarh Division. On this basis the Chief Postmaster General [CPMG], UP Circle, Lucknow issued an instruction that all appointments in the various divisions should be reviewed. According to the Respondents, upon such review the Post Master General ("PMG"), Agra Division found the following irregularities in the engagement of GDS, BPM in the Aligarh Division:

"(i) The Notification issued inviting applications for this post was in contravention of GDS (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011. Thus, while the prescribed maximum age limit was 60 years in the Notification issued on 24.09.2014 by SSPO Aligarh, this was mentioned as 64 years. Further, as per provision of the Rules, the crucial date for determination of age limit was closing date for receipt of applications from, candidates whereas SSPO Aligarh prescribed this to be the date on which the Notification was issued.

(ii) Last date for receipt of application was extended'' by SSPO Aligarh, on his own, with ulterior motive.

(iii) As per Court orders on the subject in cases of engagement of GDS, a reserved panel was required to be prepared to take care of situations where the selected candidate refuses to join or resigns within one year of joining. The select panel was to be in proportion of 05 candidates for each vacancy and was to remain valid for a year. However; SSPO, Aligarh did not prepare any such panel.

(iv) In cases of 71 engagements; made by the SSPO, it was found that i