JUDGMENT

Devan Ramachandran, J The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 order of the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench (CAT); and also Ext.P1 order which is consequential to it.

2. The petitioner was working as a Postman and says that he was entitled to his first ‘Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme’ (MACP) benefit on 01.04.1995; the second MACP benefit on 01.04.2005 and the third benefit thereunder from 01.04.2015. He admits that he never approached any authority seeking the third benefit; and explains that this is because there was a Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) Circular against him at the relevant time. He says that, however, this Circular was challenged by someone in Delhi, which was allowed by the CAT; then confirmed by the Delhi High Court and finally by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the year 2021. He asserts that he was not aware of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court till the year 2024; and that, on being so informed, he preferred Annexure A2 representation, dated 20.11.2024, before the Chief Postmaster General, Kerala Circle; which, when remained unconsidered, constrained him to move the learned CAT.

3. The petitioner complains that