ORDER

(As per Hon’ble Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Judicial Member) By this OA, the applicant sought the following relief:

“……..call for the records and quash and set aside the 2nd respondent's Memo No. ST/BCR/APSR/2011 Dated 06-05-2014 being illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to grant TBOP promotion to the applicant with effect from 24-03-1998 when he completes 16 years of qualifying service with all consequential benefits as no disciplinary cases are contemplated against the applicant on that date and the later suspension period was treated as duty for all purposes and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed as a Postal Assistant on 21.05.1982 and while working as such, charge sheet was issued to him on 28.10.1998. Prior to issuance of charge sheet, the applicant was put under suspension from 13.05.1998 to 01.11.1998. Subsequently, the said suspension has been revoked and applicant came to be re-instated into the service vide order dated 07.06.2002. The said period of suspension is treated as a duty, in accordance with G.I Dept. of Per & Trg OM No.11012/15/85-Est(A) dated 3-12-8. After the applicant was issued with the said charge memo, detailed inquiry was conducted, and after inquiry IO has submitted the report, and applicant was imposed penalty with minor punishment. Of reduction of pay by 3 stages from 4900 to 4600 for a period of 2 years w.e.f. 01.4.2001 vide Memo dated 19-3-

2001. It was further ordered that the official will not earn his increments of pay during the period of reduction and that on the expiry of this period of reduction, it will not have the effect of postponing of his future increments of pay.

Pe 3 of 6

3. The applicant’s case was placed before the DPC, held on 21.8.1998, for grant of promotion under the TBOP Scheme but DPC didn’t recommend his case and kept his case in sealed cover as he was under suspension w.e.f.13.05.1998. Even thereafter, the applicant’s case has been considered 4 times, but not recommended. The said suspension was revoked, minor penalty of reduction of pay has been imposed and finally the DPC was held on 31.10.2003. The case of the applicant was recommended for grant of upgradation under TBOP w.e.f. 01.04.2003.

4. It is submitted that inducted in training from 1982. Thereby, he was under theoretical training for period of two and half months he also undergone with the practical training at Kurnool Division for two weeks.

The respondents have ignored the said period. Once the applicant’s suspension period has been regularized as duty period, the said benefit cannot denied to the applicant. Hence, the applicant approached this Tribunal.

5. After notice, respondents have appeared through their counsel, filed detailed reply opposing the relief on the ground that it is not in dispute that after completion of training, applicant entered into the department on 21.05.1982 as a Postal Assistant. According to the respondents, the applicant has completed 16 years of by 20.05.1998. The applicant was under suspension from 13.05.1998 till 01.11.1998. Subsequently, the same has been revoked and applicant came to be reinstated into the service.

However, in disciplinary proceedings, upon receipt of the inquiry report, applicant has been imposed with punishment that “Reduction reduction of pay by 3 stages from 4900 to 4600 for a period of 2 years w.e.f. 01.4.2001” vide memo No. INV/F-6/MISC-1/98/R-14/KIE dated 19-3-2001. It was Pe 4 of 6 further ordered that the official will not earn his increments of pay during the period of reduction and that on expiry of this period of reduction it will not have the effect of postponing of his future increments of pay.

6. The respondents further contended that DPCs were held in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, & 2002 and as the applicant was under suspension and thereafter, minor