(Pronounced by Hon'ble Ms. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Member(J))

The applicants have filed this OA under Section 19 of the

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking for the following reliefs:

“1.To call for the records of the 2^nd Respondent pertaining to his

order made in No.STA/2-79/NP/2015 dated 14/18.05.2015 &

No.STA/2-79/NP/2015 dated 10.08.2015 respectively and set aside

the same; consequent to,

2. direct the Respondents to extend the benefit of judgments of

this Hon’ble Tribunal made in O.A.No.679 of 2003 dated 19.03.2004

and the Judgment of the Cuttack Bench of this Hon’ble Tribunal

made in O.A.No.1196 of 2004 O.A.Nos.1213 - 1221 of 2004 dated

23.07.2008 and further direct to revise and re-fix the retirement

service benefits of the Applicant accordingly with all benefits .”

2.

The brief facts of the case as stated by the applicants are as follows:

The 1^st Applicant joined the Respondents Department as a Postman on

06.06.1966 and promoted to the cadre of Postal Assistant (PA) on

29.07.1971. He was granted Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) after

completion of 16 years of service and BCR on completion of 26 years of

service. He retired from service while working as Biennial Cadre Review

Sub-Postmaster (BCR SPM) on superannuation on 31.07.2002. The 2^nd

Applicant joined the Respondents Department as a Postman on 02.06.1966

and promoted to the cadre of Postal Assistant (PA) on 28.09.1971. He was

granted Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) after completion of 16 years of

service and BCR on completion of 26 years of service. He retired from service

while working as Biennial Cadre Review Sub-Postmaster (BCR SPM) on

superannuation on 31.10.2001. Since, the introduction of TBOP and BCR, the

Postal Department, kept in abeyance of giving promotion to the eligible

4

official to the cadre LSG because the pay to the cadre of TBOP and LSG is

one and the same. The pay for BCR and HSG II is also one and the same.

The promotion to the cadre of LSG was kept in abeyance by the Department

for a very long time. Hence, the BCR officials having 3 years experience were

eligible for promotion to the cadre of HSG-I as per the instructions issued by

the Department from time to time. The contention of the applicants is that

similarly placed persons like the applicants filed O.A. No.679 of 2003 before

this Hon’ble Tribunal claiming promotion to the cadre of HSG - I by treating

the service rendered in the capacity of BCR as equivalent to HSG -II cadre

and it was allowed by an order dated 19.03.2004. The W.P.No.27062 of 2004

filed by the Department against that order was dismissed by the Hon’ble

High Court, Madras on 24.09.2004. The SLP was also dismissed by an order

dated 09.03.2011. The grievance of the applicants is that though they had

completed more than 3 years in BCR cadre (equivalent to HSG - II)

and eligible to be promoted notionally to the cadre of HSG - I and

thereby entitled for revision and re-fixation of the retirement service

benefits including pension, the respondent department has not considered

their cases for grant of similar relief. Further the Cuttack Bench of this

Hon’ble Tribunal in O.A.No.1196 of 2004 and O.A.Nos.1213-1221 of 2004 has

granted similar relief to similarly situated persons like the applicants and

allowed the OAs and thereafter, the Department also complied with the said

order vide memo No.ST/26-15/2013 dated 04.02.2015. The applicants'

representations in this regard were turned down by the respondent

department and hence the present OA.

3.

The respondents have filed a detailed reply. The thrust of the reply is

that the judgments, cited by the applicants for extension of similar relief as

5

they are similarly situated and their case is covered by the said orders

passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal as well as the co-ordinate bench at Cuttack

which attained finality as the respondents have implemented the said orders,

are applicable only to those applicants therein since the orders are in

personam. The re