ORDER

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Ms. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Member(J)) The applicant has filed the present OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief:

"“To set aside Memo No. REP/32-O.A. 1675/2018-CAT dated

04.11.2019, issued by the 3rd Respondent and direct the Respondent to extend the benefit of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CA 7773 of 2009 dated 31.7.2010 and regularise the services of the Applicant in a Group D post from the date of his initial appointment with all attendant and consequential benefits as was granted to identically situated persons and pass such further or other orders as may be deemed fit and proper.” ."

2.The brief facts of the case as stated by the applicant in nutshell are as under:

The applicant's father who was working as MTS in the respondent department died on 24.12.1993 while in service. On the request of the applicant for grant of compassionate ground appointment the applicant's case has been approved for appointment and he was placed in the waiting list stating therein that many seniors are there in the wait list whom they yet to absorb and the same was communicated to the applicant vide letter dated 03.02.1999. In the meanwhile he has been appointed as ED Packer w.e.f 20.09.1995 purely on provisional basis. The respondent department has taken a policy decision in respect of discontinuation of waiting list of Group D candidates approved for compassionate appointment with the approval that the candidates for compassionate appointment who could not be given employment in the department can also be absorbed in other Government Departments if they were willing and willingness has been called from the said candidates, vide communication dated 31.05.2001. Accordingly the applicant has given his willingness by his letter dated 06.06.2001 thereby accepting the same the respondents have accommodated the applicant as GDS. Subsequently in the year 2012, the applicant being qualified for appearing in the department examination and applied for the same and he has been selected as Postman thereby appointment of Postman has been issued in the year 2013. While so, similarly situated persons like the applicant approached this Tribunal for their regularisation in OA 862/2001 & batch wherein this Tribunal by order dated 28.03.2002 directed the respondents to consider them for regularisation against regular post. The said order of this Tribunal attained finality before the Hon. Supreme court and the services of the said employees have been regularised. When the applicant made representation dated 18.07.2018 for regularisation of his services in the light of the Hon.Supreme Court order. When there is no response, he filed OA 1675/2018 wherein by order dated 21.12.2018 directed the respondents to consider the representation in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and speaking order. Pursuant to that order, the applicant's representation was rejected by the respondents, vide impugned order dated 04.11.2019. Hence he has filed the present OA seeking for the above said relief.

3.After notice, the respondents have entered appearance through their counsel and filed their reply and opposed the relief claimed by the applicant on the ground that the applicant was not a party in the said IA/OA/WP and SLP and the directions of the Hon. Supreme court is limited only to the respondents of SLPs and is not open to all. The 3rd respondent have issued orders to regularise the respondents in the said SLP vide memo dated 30.08.2010. The applicant should have immediately represented for similar relief at that time. Moreover his case cannot be equated to the cases of the respondents of SLP, since the applicant in this OA was already given GDS appointment and even after discontinuation of waiting list his status remained the same as GDS and he