The court held that applicants' claims for regularization were barred by res judicata and delay, as they had previously sought similar relief which was denied.

ORDER

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

The applicants filed the present OA, under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, challenging the impugned order dt. 11.10.2018 and for a direction to consider their cases for regularization of services rendered as RTP (Reserved Trained Pool) with consequential benefits.

2. The facts of the case, briefly, as stated by the applicant, are that they were initially selected as Short Duty Telegraphists (SDTLS)/ Short Duty Telegraph Assistants and subsequently, drawn into Reserved Trained Pool after completion of prescribed training. During the initial five weeks training period, they were paid stipend @ 130 per month. On successful completion of training, they were appointed as Short Duty Telegraphist. Their services were utilized against the vacancies available then. After initial recruitment, they were all absorbed permanently as Telegraph Assistants in Department of Telecommunications (DOT), but their services were not regularized from the date of initial recruitment for Short Duty (RTP) against the vacancies available then, even though the recruitment, training process was done as per the recruitment rules in the interest of the administration. This Hon’ble Tribunal allowed OA No. 1053 of 1997 on 21.01.1999 and the Hon’ble CAT/ Ernakulam allowed the OA No. 133 of 2009 on 09.07.2010 on identical issue. The Hon’ble High Court of Kerala had also dismissed the appeal OP (CAT) No.158 of 2010 in OA No. 133 of 2009 and the Review Petition No. 880 of 2013 on 10.08.2017 filed by the respondents in OP (CAT) No. 158 of 2010. The request of the applicants was not considered vide impugned order No. 250-12-2018-Estt.III dated 11.10.2018 for regularization of services rendered as RTP. Hence, the OA.

3. After notice, the respondents have appeared through their counsel, filed detailed relief and opposed the relief on the ground that the OA is not maintainable and is barred by limitation. The applicants were initially recruited as Short Duty Telegraphists, as per the prevailing guidelines i.e. vide DG P&T, New Delhi No. 207/66/80-STN dated 29.11.1980. At the time of recruitment, additional list of candidates (Part B) was prepared against drop outs and for future vacancies, and they were also imparted training like the candidates in the main list. These officials are engaged intermittently on short duty on hourly basis in a day as per the administrative requirement & work load, but not continuously. The short duty engagement of the operators does not confer any right to regular and continuous employment in the department. The applicants’ claim is solely based on the order passed in the matter of Smt. M L Symala & Ors.

4. The respondents stated that the issue involved in the matter of ML Symala & Ors and the present matter is totally different. In the said matter, the issue involved is about non-implementation of the directions of the CGMT, Kerala Circle by the then TDE of Thiruvalla Division. 10 posts of Telephone Operators were created on 20.05.1983 and only 3 were filled up by regularizing 3 RTPs w.e.f. 1.11.1983 whereas the remaining 7 posts were not filled up by the then TDE Thiruvalla Division. Due to administrative delay on the part of the then TDE Thiruvalla in not regularizing the remaining 7 RTPs, a case was filed by the aggrieved officials in the Ernakulam Bench of this Tribunal and not against the RTP and the relief sought for was to fill up 7 newly created posts on due date, which was over delayed by the Thiruvalla Division owing to some administrative laches. The policy of RTP was not under challenge at any point of time in the said OA. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dt. 01.08.1997 in CA No. 80-123/1996 and batch of similar cases held that “any service which was rendered prior to regular appointment in the cadre cannot count for the purpose of this rule because it cannot be considered as service in any eligible cadre”. The same was communicated to all Te