CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM BENCH Original Application No.180/00522/2024 Wednesday this the 18^th day of February 2026 C O R A M :

HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON'BLE Mr.BRAJ MOHAN AGRAWAL, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Vishnupriya.A., D/o.Harikumar.M., Aged 24 years, Gramin Dak Sevak, Chennithala.

Residing at Poovanal, Mannarasala P.O., Haripad, Alappuzha – 690 514. ...Applicant (By Advocates Mr.R.Sreeraj & Mrs.Rekha Vasudevan)

v e r s u s

1. The Chief Postmaster General, Department of Posts, Kerala Circle, Trivandrum – 695 033.

2. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Department of Posts, Mavelikkara Division, Mavelikkara – 690 101.

3. The Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices, Mavelikkara North Sub Division, Mavelikkara – 690 101. ...Respondents (By Advocate Mr.M.N.Manmadan, SCGSC)

This application having been heard on 6^th February, 2026 the Tribunal on

18^th February 2026 delivered the following :

O R D E R

HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER The applicant is a Gramin Dak Sevak of Mavelikkara Division under the Postal Department appointed by Annexure A-8 dated 06.10.2022. She belong to Persons with Disability (Orthopaedically Handicapped – One leg) category evidenced by Annexure A-4 dated 26.10.2018 and assessed with 20% disability. She belongs to Other Backward Class (OBC) and entitled for the benefit of it.

She was a graduate and is pursuing Post Graduate studies.

2. Notification was issued by the Postal Department inviting applications for filling up the post of GDS. Applicant responded by submitting Annexure A-5 application. She was selected against the PWD-C category and engaged as GDS in Mavelikkara Division.

3. While so, she applied for recruitment to the cadre of MTS selected from among eligible GDS candidates. Annexure A-9 is the copy of Annexure-I of the application form submitted by her. All the candidates except the applicant received the hall tickets. Since she did not get the hall ticket, she made an inquiry and she was asked to report at the office of the 2^nd respondent. She reported on 23.08.2024, whereupon she was served with Annexure A-1 informing that her application for the LDCE/CE for promotion to the cadre of PM/MG and MTS from GDS for the year 2024 cannot be considered since she was initially selected under the PWD-C as GDS with 20% disability which was below the benchmark of disability for selection. Thereafter the 3^rd respondent served Annexure A-2 order of termination of her engagement dated 12.09.2024 and terminating her from the post of GDS with immediate effect from the date of service of the notice.

4. Aggrieved by Annexure A-1 and Annexure A-2, the applicant has approached this Tribunal contending that the above are bad in law and it was issued without compliance with the legal provisions. It was stated that Rule 8 of GDS (Conduct & Engagement) Rules was unconstitutional in so far as it authorized any employment to be terminated without following the legal procedures. It was also stated that Annexure A-1 and Annexure A-2 were issued in violation of Rule 8(2) of GDS (Conduct & Engagement) rules, 2020.

5. The main relief sought in the Original Application are as follows -

1. Declare that there is no illegality or infirmity in the initial engagement of the applicant as GDS, Kidangoor S.O and quash Annexure A-1 and Annexure A-2.

2. Declare that Rule 8 of the GDS (Conduct & Engagement) Rules, 2020 is unconstitutional and ultravires the Right to Information Act, 2005 and hence Annexure A-2 is without jurisdiction.

3. Direct the respondents to restore the engagement of the applicant as GDS, Chennithala with full consequential benefits and consider her for recruitment as MTS, if necessary by conducting a fresh examination for her.

6. At the time of admission an interim stay of Annexure A-2 was granted pursuant to which the applicant is continuing in service.

7. Respondents filed a detailed reply statement contending that the applicant was not a person belonging to the PWD categor