The principle of treating similarly placed persons similarly, as per Article 14 of the Constitution of India, influenced the Court's decision.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench viz., 19th respondent in its OA No.1910/2017 dated 06.02.2020 and quash the same.

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench viz., 21st respondent in its OA No.1922/2017 dated 06.02.2020 and quash the same.)

Common Order:

V. Lakshminarayanan, J.

1. These Writ Petitions have been filed by the Union of India and others challenging the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench in O.A.Nos.1910 and 1912 of 2017 dated 06.02.2020.

2. By the impugned order, the Central Administrative Tribunal set aside the order of promotion of the applicants therein dated 03.07.2017 and directed the respondents therein/writ petitioners herein to conduct a review DPC and consider the granting of retrospective promotion to the applicants notionally from the date of their juniors in the Regional Seniority List were promoted with consequential fixation of pay. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the financial implications involved had stated that the applicants, if at all, will be entitled to arrears of pay only from the date of filing the original applications i.e., 12.12.2017.

3. Mr.V.Vijay Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that apart from the 1st respondent, the other respondents have already got the benefit of promotion. Before the Tribunal, they did not enter appearance and contest the application. He sought for permission of the Court to dispense with notice to them and take up the main writ petitions for disposal. Mr.Ulaganathan, learned counsel representing the 1st respondent also agreed this course of action. Accordingly, we dispense with notice to the private respondents.

4. The reliefs in both the writ petitions are identical and the facts are also similar.

5. The applicants were appointed as Stenographers Grade-III in the office of the writ petitioners in 1988. They were promoted to the post of Stenographer Grade-II in 1998 and from that post, they became Personal Assistant in the year 2000. The cause of action for filing the original application before the Tribunal was that the promotion was granted with effect from 03.07.2017 as Private Secretary. Prior to the framing of the Employees'' Provident Fund Organisation Stenographers Service Rules, 1998, there was a recommendation by the Executive Committee of the EPFO. It decided to restructure the post of Senior Personal Assistants/Personal Assistants/Stenographers in Grades-A, B, C and D. A direction was given that the promotion should follow the category of the ratio of 40 : 40 : 20 with respect to Stenographer, Personal Assistant and Private Secretary. This was brought into force on 22.09.1999. The rules were applied, even with respect to posts which were vacant, prior to the date of framing rules viz., 02.01.1999.

6. Aggrieved by the same, one Vinod Kumar Gover and others approached the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.2243 of 2001. The Tribunal was called upon to decide whether the rules published on 02.01.1999 would apply prospectively or would also apply to the vacancies which had occurred prior to the framing of the rules. Following the classic judgement of Y.V.Rangaiah vs. J.Sriniwas Rao reported in AIR 1983 SC 82, the Tribunal was pleased to hold that vacancies which occurred prior to the amended rules have to be governed by the old rules and not by the new rules. The order in Vinod Kumar Gover''s case was not challenged by the writ petitioners and it was implicitly implemented by them. By virtue of that order, 40 persons who were Juniors to the applicants were promoted together with monetary benefit from 26.09.2000. In order to bring the appl