Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 2977
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
B.K SHRIVASTAVA, J, DR. SANJIV KUMAR, A
A B Godse – Appellant
Versus
Department Of Posts – Respondent
O.A./312/2024
Shri.P.Kamalesan, Shri.N.Amaresh for R 1 to 4
The Tribunal affirmed the principle of legitimate expectation, directing the grant of grade pay based on established government policy after four years of service.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Claim for grade pay - Applicant sought grade pay of Rs.5400/- after completing four years of service in grade pay of Rs.4800/- as per Government resolution dated 29-08-2008 - The Tribunal found merit in the claim based on similar previous judgments. (Paras 1, 8, 9, 10)
(B) Legitimate expectation - The applicant had a legitimate expectation for the grant of grade pay based on established government policy and previous judicial orders. (Paras 2, 8)
Facts of the case:
The applicant, an Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices, claimed grade pay of Rs.5400/- effective from 19-10-2015 after serving four years in grade pay of Rs.4800/-. The claim was based on a government resolution and previous judicial orders. (Paras 1, 2)
Findings of Court:
The Tribunal allowed the application, directing the respondents to consider the applicant's case for grade pay in light of previous orders and grant relief as per eligibility. (Paras 9, 10)
Issues: The main issues were the eligibility for grade pay based on service duration and the interpretation of government resolutions. (Paras 8, 9)
Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal emphasized that the applicant's case was similar to previous cases where grade pay was granted after four years of service, reinforcing the principle of legitimate expectation in administrative decisions. (Paras 8, 9)
Result: The Original Application is allowed, directing the respondents to grant the applicant the grade pay of Rs.5400/- as per eligibility.
ORDER
PER: DR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A)
This Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 claiming the following reliefs:
“1. Direct the respondents to grant grade pay of Rs.5400/- to the applicant from19-10- 2015, since the applicant was granted grade pay of Rs.4800/- from 19-10-2011, vide Chief Post Master General, Karnataka Circle, Bangalore-560216 Memo No.STA/1- 21/MACP/July 10 dated: 4-1-2012 Annexure-A2, and eligible to be granted grade pay of Rs.5400/- in accordance with Government of India, Ministry of Finance letter No.1/1/2008/c resolution dated: 29-8- 2008 para 1(x)(e) Annexure A1.
2. Grant any other relief as deemed fit into the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity. ”
2. These reliefs are claimed on the grounds as mentioned in paragraphs 5(a) to (e) of the Original Application. The brief facts as narrated by the applicant are that the applicant was working as Assistant Superintendent of Post offices (Group 'B'). The applicant was granted grade pay of Rs.4800/- from 19-10-2011. In accordance with the Finance Ministry resolution dated: 29-8-2008, the Group 'B' officers of the Department of Posts, Revenue etc will be granted grade pay of Rs.5400/- in PB2 on a non-functional basis after 4 years of regular service in grade pay of Rs.4800/- in PB2. The Applicant completed four years of regular service in grade pay of Rs.4800/- as of 19-10-2015, and he was eligible to be granted grade pay of Rs.5400/- from that date. The applicant has a legitimate expectation that he will be granted grade pay of Rs.5400/- in accordance with the Finance Ministry Resolution and also by many judicial orders on the subject. Since he was not granted grade pay of Rs.5400/-, the applicant submitted representations on 29-9-2021 and 15-4-2024 to grant him grade pay of Rs.5400/-. The applicant submits that non- grant of grade pay of Rs.5400/- is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of judicial orders. Hence the applicant has approached this Tribunal seeking the afore-mentioned reliefs.
3. On notice, the respondents have filed their reply statement. No rejoinder has been filed thereafter.
4. The case came up for final hearing on 20.2.2025. Shri P.Kamalesan for the applicant and Shri N.Amaresh for the respondents were present and heard.
5. We have carefully gone through the entire records and considered the rival contention.
6. As there was a delay of more than 3130 days in filing the O.A., the applicant has filed an M.A. No.321/2024 for condoning the delay. As the matter relates to pay fixation and as per various judicial pronouncements and their interpretations, the M.A. has been allowed on 10.01.2025 and the delay in filing the O.A. is condoned.
7. The main contention of the applicant is that his case is covered by the judgment passed by this Tribunal in O.A No.170/206/2024 dated 20.12.2024.
8. As we have examined and compared the facts of this present case with that of OA No. 170/206/2024 , we find that the fact of this O.A has similarities with the facts of the case in O.A No.206/2024 except that in the present case, the applicant was to be granted the grade pay of Rs.4800/- much earlier on 19.10.2011 wherein all other cases which are referred, it was in the year 2019. We also find that in this case, two representations have been filed by the applicant, but no order had been issued by the respondents. Hence, it may be sufficient to pass the following orders to examine the representation of the applicant in the light of the order in O.A 170/206/2024 dated 20.12.2024 and give all admissible reliefs to the applicant as per his eligibility.
9. The decision of this Tribunal in O.A No.170/206/2024 is as follows:
“ This OA is filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 claiming the following reliefs: -
“(a) Quash O/O Post Master General, South Karnataka Region, Bangalore – 560001 letter No. SK/STA/1-6/ASP-IP/Court cases/2023/1 dated 12/14- 2/2024 vide Annexur
