Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Editorial - August 2007 Bhartiya Post
The seven Blind men of Hindustan and the Elephant is not the tale to be retold only to the children. Adults in all walks of life also have many lessons to learn from this common folk story. As long as the power of vision is absent, the size and shape can only be guessed and assessed.
There is a tall claim that the Business Development in postal earns profit. When it was questioned whether the profit is derived from the revenue minus working expenditure, the reply is 'No'. Thus, the revenue has been trumpeted as the profit without subjecting the amount with working expenses, leaving entire expenses on postal operations and claiming ' Business activities' a profitable one.
The CAG report placed before the Parliament exposed the success rate of postal business and brought into light about the loss of crores of rupees owing to doing business not professionally. The existence of Automatic Mail Processing Centres installed at Chennai & Mumbai, the living symbol of white elephants is drifting away the Government money every month. When it is pleaded by the service unions for a long, it turned to the deaf ears. Now the CAG reported that the department did not succeed despite the investment of Rs. 60.25 crores in installing AMPCs at Mumbai & Chennai. The paradox in this is that the department is proposing to install further 24 AMPC centres during the eleventh plan period. No body bothers about the loss sustained to the department due to these AMPCs. In the name of business, many Circle / Administrative offices are now converted as Five Star Guest house for relaxation and rest.
The department has recently augmented 29 posts of senior and junior administrative grades to handle the business management and marketing by abolishing 47 operative senior time scale posts. Not even a single post in the operative cadres like Postal Assistant in post offices, Dealing Assistants in RO / CO has so far been created for the business & marketing whereas 29 top bureaucratic posts were now created. A swelling head with a shrinking body! An excuse and justification to increase wasteful expenditure on business!
Large funds are diverted from General expenditure to wasteful expenditure on promoting business and premium products. If the department desires to enter professional marketing activities, it requires only the MBAs & experts and not the bureaucrats in the senior administrative grade.
Take an example -- Speed Post is the premium project. As per the Annual Report of the Department of Posts for the year 2006-07 the speed post in incurring a loss of Rs. 8.46 Per article. (Average cost Rs. 44.54 : Average Revenue 36.08) Then what is the business? The worse is yet to come. The way the management is systematically diverting registration traffics to premium products or reducing the rate of speed post etc. comparing the traditional postal services is bound to reduce the traffic bound revenue in the years to come. Slashing of speed post rate to the extent of one rate one India Rs. 25/- & Rs. 12/- etc. will further increase the loss to the department. Is this the method of countering couriers?
The workload of the postal Group 'C' cadre has gone up by 200 percent within five years. The lopsided development is primarily due to the unscientific axing of posts under the Screening Committee on hand and entering various new business as the other. There is a staff cut at lower level to the extent of 19% within five years. There is a static or increase in the number of officers in the name of business activities & modernisation.
If we fails the undo the wrong decision hitherto adhered that will erode the creditability of the organisation. This will cause a dent that will be sharp and significant. Substitutes are always substitutes, but can never replace the originals. The time old proved system in functioning of the postal operations will never be recovered by the changes that are taking place in the present days.
When centralisation of power is in the agenda at lower levels why not it be implemented at higher levels first. What is the need of separate business Directorate? What is the need of separate PLI Directorate? What is the need of separate business heads at Circle level who do nothing. What is the business they secured? What is the profit they maintained minus the luxury expenses spent on seminar, meetings, compliments, TA and marketing. Why not transparency exists in all these matters?
To save the postal service, Let us propose an operation abolition. Let the axing and economy begin at the top. Abolish the Business & PLI Directorate! Abolish the Postal Board, the Chairman and Members lock stock and barrel. Let there be only one Director General for the department. The Department was functioning better and more effectively and efficiently when we had no board and the pantheon of the members. Let us enter to the old glory in serving public with the time bound delivery and keeping our old tradition of 'Service before Self.'
Editorial - July Bhartiya Post
There is a misapprehension in the minds of our members that our Union / Federation has consented to the Government to expel or eliminate of ED Union from NFPE.
Not even an iota of truth in the purported false propagandas. The Federation Circular dated 29-05-2007 would have cleared all the doubts prevailing hitherto and no other explanation needs at this juncture.
The Department of Personnel which is the nodal ministry forming and framing the policy of the Government of India has categorically stipulated that Federations can be formed and recognised only among the unions which cover the Government servants to whom CCS (Conduct) Rules 1964 apply and granted recognition under the RSA Rules 1993.
Since the GDS Union is recognised under different set of rules framed locally by the Department of Posts, the DoP&T time and again rejected our request for the inclusion of GDS Union in the Federation. Now we are pushing to the wall either to accept recognition without GDS Union or remain without recognition.
We have not participated the first verification of membership in 1995 duly rejecting the various provisions of the rules. FNPO & BPEF participated. The FNPO, thus could secure more than 15%. Thereafter we participated in the second verification held in 1997 in which we secured the first position. In the first verification for GDS, in 1997, there is only one union (i.e. AIPEDE Union) recognised. If we would have missed the bus then, the loss would have been miserable.
Similar is the position now. FNPO has applied for recognition as per DoP&T guidelines. We cannot be left in isolation. The decision of the NFPE that we can get recognition first and continue our efforts for the inclusion of GDS Union is the only alternative available. Till then the GDS Union remains part & parcel of the NFPE as an associated member and will have all rights unofficially except in holding offices in which is prohibited due to the DoP&T guidelines.
In many circles there is no RJCM; No regular periodical meeting or Departmental Council meeting since 1995; No nomination of fresh members; Resultantly the conciliation machinery become totally defunct. Without official recognition, nothing is possible to mitigate demands and improve the situation. One should accept the fact that without proper recognition of the Government, we could not clinch even small issues and take forward our movement further. We have no other alternative!
Unless the policy of the Government is changed and liberalise the Federation recognition rules which is practically impossible to exercise since 2002 to till day, there is no chance in the immediate nearby to modify the policy of the Government in this regard.
Let us be practical and plain. Let us not drift or dither away with imaginary thinkings and forget the reality and reasons. Let us not play any game for the sake of others. Let us realise the reality and consider the only option available before us to accept recognition and fight further for the inclusion of GDS union in our Federation. Let us think positively, act, advance and achieve our goal to affiliate GDS Union in future by sustained struggles after availing recognition to our Federation.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
News Letter dated 27 July 2007
Date: 27 July 2007
NEWS LETTER
All CWC Members,
All Divisional / Branch Secretaries,
AIPEU Group 'C',
Dear Comrades,
Formation of Officer's Committee on GDS - Violation of Agreement
JCA - Programme of Action
The Department of Posts vide its resolution dated 23-07-2007 constituted a 'One-Man Committee' under the Chairmanship of Shri R.S. Nataraja Murti, retired Member of Postal Services Board. The copy of the same is enclosed.
We are surprised to know that the Committee had started its functioning on 24-07-2007 itself before we knew the constitution of the committee. The fact about formation of 'Officers Committee' has been just appraised to the GDS Union orally. This is quite shocking and surprising since the department implemented its game of divide & rule.
This formation of Officers Committee to deal the GDS issues is nothing but a blatant violation and deviation of agreement and assurances made during the talks on 19-04-2007. In case of rejection of to refer the GDS issues to the Sixth Pay Commission by the Ministry of Finance, the department would have convened another meeting with the Staff Side and appraised the situation as assured in the discussions prior to the strike proposed to be held from 24-04-07 or at least the original demand of the JCA to form Judicial Committee should have been considered afresh with open mind.
By neglecting the Federations (both NFPE / FNPO) and just informing the GDS Union orally and formed the one-man committee headed by a retired officer is causing a serious concern. The Department has properly utilised the 'Wide Gap' prevailing on recognition issue among us and exposed the weakness properly. The department desires to exploit the situation and deviate the agreement. It was not even ready to discuss the staff side, but implemented its own earlier decision.
All the stern struggles launched over one year become futile if we allow the present situation. On 26-04-07, I requested Com. S.S. Mahadevaiah, General Secretary, GDS Union to meet Com. C.C. Pillai in person and discuss the issue with open mind. Accordingly we met at his office. Com. C.C.Pillai, Secretary General, NFPE contacted to Com. D. Theyagarajan, Secretary General, FNPO immediately in our presence for a United Programme against the formation of Officer's Committee. He also consented immediately. All-out efforts are taken for a united movement.
There is a demarcation either unknowingly or wantonly made between the regular and GDS employees after the recognition issue. We have to accept the reality and take responsibility. At least now we have to sort it out. We have to unite by shedding all our differences if need be with some sacrifices too. Otherwise, the Govt. will implement its own agenda and we shall remain as silent spectators and allow the exploited class of GDS for further exploitation.
We should not allow any further exploitation and put to an end. Please adhere the following programmes sincerely and seriously with all affiliates of NFPE / FNPO.
JCA - Programme of Action
03-08-2007 - Demonstration at work spot
08-08-07 - Dharna Programme in front of all Circle / Regional /
Divisional Headquarters
Further, telegrams containing the following text may be given to Hon'ble Minister of Communications & Secretary, Department of Posts immediately.
"We strongly protest against setting up of GDS Committee headed by retired officer instead of Judicial Commission as demanded by the Staff Side."
Secretary,
…………………………….Division
Further programme of action will be decided by the JCA soon. Let us unite, agitate and act to defeat the evil design of the department to form Officer's Committee to consider the demands of GDS instead of Judicial Commission.
ALL ARE REQUESTED TO IMPLEMENT THE CALL IMMEDIATELY AND INTIMATE COMPLIANCE REPORT TO CHQ.
Resolution of Department of Posts dated 23rd July 2007
No. 6-1/2006-PE.II --- The question of examining the conditions of service and emoluments and other facilities available to the Gramin Dak Sevaks has been under the consideration of the Government of India for some time. The Government has now decided to set up a one-man committee for the purpose.
2. Shri R.S. Nataraja Murti, Retired Member of the Postal Services Board will constitute the Committee.
3. The Committee will go into the service conditions of Gramin Dak Sevaks and suggest changes as considered necessary. The terms of reference of the Committee will, inter allia, include the following:-
(a) To examine the system of extra departmental post offices, conditions of employment, wage structure of the Gramin Dak Sevaks and recommend suitable changes considered necessary.
(b) To examine the reasonableness of introducing a social security scheme for providing provident fund and retirement benefits to Gramin Dak Sevaks.
(c) To examine and suggest any change in the method of recruitment, minimum qualifications for appointment as Gramin Dak Sevaks and conduct & disciplinary rules.
(d) To review the facilities provided to the public at different classes of extra departmental post offices.
(e) To examine desirability and need to sanction any interim relief till the time of recommendations of the Committee are made and accepted by the Government.
4. The committee will function for a period of one year, extendable at the discretion of the Government.
5. The Chairman of the Committee will be assisted by Shri A.K. Sharma, a Senior Administrative Grade Officer of the Department who will act as Secretary to the GDS Committee. Adequate staff support will be provided to the committee by the Department of Post. The committee will keep the 6th Central Pay Commission informed of the progress of its work from time to time.
6. The Committee will devise its own procedure and may call for such information an take such evidence, as considered necessary.
7. The headquarters of the Committee will be at New Delhi.
Sanction of the competent authority is accorded for setting up of the Secretariat of the proposed GDS Committee with the following establishment:
Sl. No.
Name of Post
No. of Post (s)*
1.
Secretary, GDS Committee
1
2.
Senior Time Scale / Junior Time Scale
1
3.
Assistant Supdt Posts
2
4.
Postal Assistant / LSG
3
5.
Private Secretary
2
6.
Group D
1
7.
Chowkidar
1
2. Following posts are developed for GDS Committee:
(i) PMG Sambalpur as Secretary, GDS Committee.
(ii) ADG (Establishment) as ADG, GDS Committee.
Delhi Circle will provide posts and staff mentioned at Sl. No. 3 to 7.
3. The Secretariat of the Committee will be located at Malcha Marg PO Complex, Chankya Puri, New Delhi 110021. Necessary requirements for the Secretariat will be made in the usual manner by the CPMG, Delhi Circle with the approval of IFA of the Circle. Any correspondence in this regard may be made with the Secretary of the Committee.
4. The expenditure on the Secretariat would be made out of the Budget of the Delhi circle. If any additional funds are needed, that may be indicated in the RE 2007-08. The pay and allowances of the officers indicated at Sl. 1 & 2 above will be drawn and disbursed by the Postal Directorate till further orders.
5. The resolution for constitution of the Committee will be issued separately.
DG (P) No. 6-1/2006-PE.II dated 24 July 2007
q Meeting with DDG (PG & QA)
A meeting with Smt. Kalpana Tewari, DDG (PG & QA) was held at Directorate to discuss about the citizen's charter for Department of Posts at 3:00 p.m. on 26-07-07. On behalf of NFPE, Com. K.V. Sridharan, General Secretary, P-III; Com. Giriraj Singh, General Secretary, R-III; Com. Iswar Dabas, Offg. General Secretary, P-IV attended the meeting. We putforth our views that unless the problem of shortage of staff is mitigated, the implementation of the citizen charter could be only in paper. We further stressed to reconsider for revival of second / third delivery which will counter the couriers in delivery.
q Arbitration Awards
No decision has been arrived in the meeting held on 18-07-2007 on all pending Arbitration Awards. Next meeting on the subject is fixed on 07-08-07.
q P-IV AIC at New Delhi
The All India Conference of All India Postal Employees Union Postman & Group 'D' is to be held at New Delhi from 21st August to 23rd August.
q National Convention of Central & State Government Employees
The Confederation of Central Government Employees & Workers along with All India State Govt. Employees Federation is holding a Joint All India Convention on 13-08-07 at New Delhi from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. on the Ten Charter of demands. The venue is MPCU Shah Auditorium, The Delhi Gujarat Samaj Marg, Civil Lines (Near ISBT) New Delhi - 54. On 14-08-08, the National Executive of the Confederation will he held at New Delhi to discuss & decide the date of one day strike in September 07 on Ten Charter of demands.
With greetings,
Yours fraternally,
K.V. Sridharan
General Secretary
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Confederation Circular
CONFEDERATION OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES AND WORKERS
Manishinath Bhawan, A-2/05 Rajouri Garden
New Delhi.110 027
Phone: 2510 5324 Fax: 2510 5324
Dated: 6th July, 2007
To
All the Secretariat Members:
Dear Comrade,
Kindly refer to the discussions we had at the NE meeting of the Confederation. As per the decision taken at the meeting, we had contacted all the other CGE organizations with the proposal to organize a day’s strike action in August, 2007. While FNPO responded positively the AIDEF has only assured to organize solidarity action on the day when we would be on strike. The AISGEF would be prepared to join the strike if the same is postponed to September, 2007 and is preceded by a National Convention at New Delhi preferably on 14th August, 2007. The Railway organizations have not responded.
It has been brought to our notice that in view of the Presidential election, the monsoon session of Parliament is likely to be postponed and may spill over to the month of September, 2007.
Taking into account these developments, we have issued today a circular letter to all our affiliates and the COCs intimating of a National Convention at New Delhi on 14th August, 2007. A copy of the said circular letter is enclosed for your information. A meeting of the members of the Secretariat is convened to be held on 21st July, 2007 at our CHQ. We request all the members to be present at the meeting. In case any of the members is unable to attend the meeting, they may kindly communicate their views to the undersigned by 20th inst.
With greetings,
Yours fraternally,
KKN Kutty
Secretary General
EMPLOYEES AND WORKERS
Manishinath Bhawan, A-2/05 Rajouri Garden
New Delhi.110 027
Phone: 2510 5324 Fax: 2510 5324
Dated: 6th July, 2007
To
All the Affiliates and the Secretaries of the COCs
Dear Comrades,
The proposal of the Confederation to organize a day’s strike in pursuance of the ten point charter of demands will be considered by the National Executive of the AISGEF. They had suggested to hold a National convention at New Delhi on 14th August, 2007 as a campaign to mobilize the mass of our members and to decide upon the date for the strike action. We have accepted the said suggestion and intimation is hereby given for such a convention on 14.8.2007. We shall intimate you the exact venue and time of the convention in due course. About 250 delegates would participate in the convention on behalf of the Confederation. The station-wise quota is as under:-
Station
No of delegates
Delhi
30
Haryana, Punjab, J & K HP and Chandigarh
40
Madhya Pradesh
20
Uttar Pradesh
20
Rajasthan
20
Bihar
05
Jharkhand
05
Chattisgarh
05
West Bengal
15
North East States: Assam,Mehalaya etc
10
Orissa
05
Gujarath
05
Mumbai
10
Vidharba
05
Andhra Pradesh
05
Tamilnadu
05
Karnataka
05
Kerala
05
Total
215
The Chief Executives of all affiliates and the Secretaries of the COCs and the National Exectuve Committee members of the Confederation shall attend the convention without fail. A meeting of these comrades will be held at New Delhi on 15th August, 2007 at the CHQ to chalk out the campaign programme. Please ensure that the return journey reservation for the delegates is made on the 14th night itself. We are making arrangements for overnight stay for those who require overnight stay at Delhi. The Secretaries of the COCs , the Chief Executives of the affiliates and the NE members will return only on 15th night or 16th morning. The other details of the convention will be communicated to you in due course.
With greetings,
Yours fraternally,
KKN Kutty
Saturday, July 7, 2007
MADRAS HIGH COURT REJECTS THE APPEAL OF DEPARTMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.6.2007
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DHARMARAO ELIPE
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU
W.P.Nos.38990 of 2002,
2832 to 2835 of 2003, 9996 of 2003, 10059 of 2003, 30188 of
2003, 30345 of 2003, 34623 of 2003,
2567 of 2004, 2711 of 2004, 2750 of 2004, 2762 of 2004, 3003
of 2004, 3004 of 2004, 3766 of 2004, 3767 of 2004, 3810 of
2004, 4163 of 2004, 4164 of 2004, 4172 of 2004, 4940 of
2004, 4986 of 2004, 5132 of 2004, 6369 of 2004, 6424 of
2004, 11367 of 2004, 21433 of 2004,
22944 of 2004, & 19967 of 2005,
AND
W.P.M.P.Nos.58153 of 2002,
3542 to 3545 of 2003, 12665 of 2003, 12760 of 2003, 36870 of
2003, 37066 of 2003, 42057 of 2003,
2934 of 2004, 3142 of 2004, 3222 of 2004, 3239 of 2004, 3537
of 2004, 3539 of 2004, 4428 of 2004, 4430 of 2004, 4481 of
2004, 4901 of 2004, 4903 of 2004, 4912 of 2004, 5771 of
2004, 5819 of 2004, 7525 of 2004, 7608 of 2004, 13392 of
2004, 25916 of 2004, 27754 of 2004,
21748 of 2005
AND
W.V.M.P.No.2067 of 2006
W.P.No.38990 of 2002:
1. Union of India,
The Chief Postmaster General
Tamil Nadu Circle
Chennai 2
2. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices
Chennai City South Division
Chennai. ..Petitioners
Vs
1. The Central Administrative Tribunal
City Civil Court Buildings
Chennai 104.
2. M.Nallavan ..Respondents
W.P.No.38990 of 2002 has been filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of
Certiorari to call for the records in O.A.No.1131 of 2001 on
the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras and
quash the order dated 28.3.2002.
===============================================================================
For petitioners in all the W.Ps. :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.V.T.Gopalan, Addl.Solilcitor General for M/s.S.Yashwanth, M.Devadoss ,
M.Dhamodharan, A.Rajendran, G.Nanmaran, K.L.Nandakumar, Sudharshan Sundar,
Sunita Kumari, P.Chandrasekaran & K.Kannan, all Central Govt.Standing Counsel
===============================================================================
For R.3 & R7 in WP.10059/2003, For R2, R3, R5, R8, R9, R11 to R42 in WP.9996/03
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.Vijay Narayanan, S.C. for M/s.R.Parthiban
===============================================================================
For R.1 in W.P.2567/2004, For R.1 in WP.3004/2004 For R.1 to R.4, R.7 to 21 in
WP.4172/2004, For R.1 in WP.3003/2004, For R.1 in 2762/2004, For R.3 to R6,
R8 to 10 & 15 in WP.6424 /2004 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.Vijay Narayanan, S.C. for M/s.Karthikmukundan
===============================================================================
For R.1 in W.P.34623/2003 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ms.R.Vaigai
===============================================================================
For R.1 in W.P.30188/2003, For R.2 in WP.11367/2004 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.P.Rajendran
===============================================================================
For R.1 in WP.4163/2004, For R.1 in WP.3810/2004, For R.1 in WP.4940/2004,
For R.2 in WP.38990/2002, For R.1 in WP.4986/2004, For R.2 in WP.22944/2004,
For R.2 in WP.2832 to 2835/2003 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.R.Malaichamy
===============================================================================
For R.1 in WP.2711/2004, WP.3766/2004, R.1 in W.P.3766/2004, for R.1 in
WP.4164/2004, For R.1 in WP.6369/2004, For R1, R.2, R.7, R11 & R.13 to R.16 in
WP.6424/2004, For R.2 in WP.21433/2004, for R.5 & R6 in WP.4172/2004 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
No appearance
===============================================================================
For R.1 & R.2 in WP.4986/2004 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.V.Vijayshankar
===============================================================================
For R.1 in W.P.19967/2005 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.A.Arokiadoss
===============================================================================
For R.2 to R.22 in W.P.2832/2003 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.M.Radhakrishnan
===============================================================================
COMMON ORDER
DHARMARAO ELIPE, J.
Since all the matters are inextricably connected with
each other, they are heard together and disposed of by this
common order.
2. The applicants before the Tribunal, who are the
respondents herein, are all the dependents of Group-C and
Group-D Staff of the Postal Department, who died in harness
or retired voluntarily on medical grounds and they all have
been approved for appointment on compassionate grounds in
Group-C and Group-D posts. They all are working in various
leave vacancies and short term vacancies. Since number of
vacancies are lying vacant, their services are being
utililzed for leave vacancies and thus they are serving
without any break in service. The applicants were awaiting
appointment in regular posts and were also imparted clerical
training by the Department itself. After the judgment of
the Apex Court in UMESH KUMAR NAGPAL vs. STATE OF HARYANA
[(1994) 4 SCC 138], fixing the number of vacancies to be
filled up by compassionate ground appointment as 5%, the
Chief Post Master General, Tamil Nadu circle, issued a
letter on 28.5.2001, seeking willingness in writing for
consideration for appointment on compassionate grounds by
other Ministries/Department from the candidates approved for
compassionate appointment, who could not be given employment
in the petitioner Department since they can also be absorbed
in other Government Departments. Accordingly, all the
applicants have submitted their willingness giving a choice
of departments in which they prefer to be appointed on
regular basis.
3. While things stood thus, the Ministry of
Communications, Union of India, by the orders dated
25.7.2001 and 4.1.2002, impugned before the Tribunal, has
taken a decision that any maintenance of the waiting list of
approved candidates for compassionate appointment should be
discontinued immediately and since the waiting list has been
disposed, this may cause hardship to the approved candidates
and in consideration of these aspects, a decision was taken
to consider such wait listed candidates for vacancies in the
post of Extra Departmental Staff. Based on the said letter,
the Chief Post Master General, Tamil Nadu Circle, has issued
a letter on 6.8.2001 to various Post Masters seeking a list
of vacancies in the Extra Departmental Staff. Aggrieved,
the applicants have filed a batch of Original Applications
before the Tribunal praying to set aside the letter dated
25.7.2001 of the Ministry of Communications, Union of India
and to direct the Department to appoint the applicants as
Postal Assistants within a time limit.
4. The writ petitioners/Department filed a common
counter before the Tribunal stating that the compassionate
appointment cases are considered by the Circle Selection
Committee, constituted in accordance with instructions of
Directorate's Letter No.24-269/87-SPB 1 dated 24.9.1989 on
merits; that as per the scheme of compassionate appointment
circulated by the Department of Personnel & Training OM
No.14014/6/94-Estt (D) dated 9.10.1998, it has been clearly
mentioned at para 7(f) that if sufficient vacancies are not
available in any particular office to accommodate the
persons in the waiting list for compassionate appointment,
it is open to the administrative Ministry/Department/Office
to take up the matter with other
Ministries/Departments/Offices of the Government of India to
provide at an early date appointment on compassionate
grounds to those in the waiting list; the Supreme Court has
ruled in the cases of HIMACHAL ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
vs. DINESH KUMAR [JT 1996(5) SC 319] and HINDUSTAN
AERONAUTICS LIMITED vs. SMT.A.RADHIKA THIRUMALAI [JT 1996
(9) SC 197] that appointment on compassionate grounds can be
made only if a vacancy is available for that purpose.
5. It is further submitted that by OM.No.14014/23/99-
Estt(d) dated 3.12.1999, it was further clarified by
Department of Personnel and Training that the Committee for
considering a request for appointment on compassionate
ground should also take into account the position regarding
availability of vacancy for such appointment for a really
deserving case and only if vacancy meant for appointment on
compassionate grounds are available within a year, that too
within the ceiling of 5% mentioned, such cases should be
approved; that the quota for compassionate appointment was
reduced to 5% as per the decision of the Government of India
communicated in Department of Posts letter No.24-170/94-SPB
I dated 11.12.1995 with the result number of candidates
selected for compassionate appointment are kept in the
waiting list; that the proposal made by the Department of
Posts to the Department of Personnel and Training to relax
the 5% limit in order to accommodate the approved candidates
kept in the waiting list was also turned down by the
Department of Personnel and Training citing the Supreme
Court judgment in U.K.Nagpal's case, cited supra, vide OM
NO.42012/4/2000-Estt (d) dated 24.11.2000; that the
Department of Posts had to discontinue the maintenance of
the waiting list of approved candidates for compassionate
appointment on the basis of Ministry of Personnel D.O.P.&T
OM No.42012/4/2000-Estt (D) dated 24.11.2000 communicated in
DG Posts letter No.24-1/99-SPB-I, dated 8.2.2001.
6. It is further submitted that as on date, all the
approved candidates already in the waiting list were asked
to express their willingness for consideration for
appointment by other Ministries, however, it was
subsequently found by the Nodal Ministry that the chances
for absorption in the Ministries are remote and that there
are also not enough vacancies; that keeping this in view, it
was felt that an opportunity can be given to such wait-
listed candidates who are waiting for some time to be
considered for vacant posts of Grameen Dak Sevaks, if they
are willing and eligible for the post and hence the Director
General (Posts) instructed the Postal circles to offer
Grameen Dak Sevaks vacancies to dependents of regular
employees (Grade C and Grade D) who are already approved for
appointment on compassionate grounds and whose names are
kept in the waiting list for want of regular departmental
vacancies under compassionate appointment quota as on
8.2.2001; that there is no obligation on the part of the
approved candidates kept in the waiting list to accept the
offer of appointment as Grameen Dak Sevaks and therefore,
there is no arbitrariness in the Scheme of offering Grameen
Dak Sevak post to the candidates as their willingness have
been called for and they have not been forced to work as
Gameen Dak Sevaks; that the averment that there are
approximately 1,500 vacancies in the posts of Postal
Assistants cadre is not correct and there are only 505
vacancies in the Postal Assistant cadre for 2001 out of
which 50% is to be filled up under Direct Recruitment; as
appointments have already been made every year upto 1999 in
the 5% quota of the compassionate appointments, and the
candidates considered over and above the prescribed quota
were kept in waiting list anticipating chances of more
vacancies and when the chances are remote, it was decided to
offer them Grameen Dak Sevak posts taking into consideration
the hardship faced by them.
7. Since the Tribunal, has quashed the impugned orders
dated 25.7.2001 and 4.1.2002 and directed the Department to
consider the case of the applicants for regularisation
against the regular vacancies in the grade of Postal
Assistants/Postman/Grade 'C' or Grade 'D' posts as per the
normal rules and orders governing compassionate ground
appointments, the Department has come forward to file these
writ petitions and obtained orders of interim stay.
8. In the meanwhile, there was a proposal to grant one
time relaxation to accommodate all the persons included in
the waiting list . Before a decision could be taken on this
proposal at the Headquarters, the Chief Post Master General,
Tamil Nadu Circle had issued a notification to fill up 146
vacancies by direct recruitment and some of the applicants
have filed O.A.No.693 of 2004 for a direction to forbear the
writ petitioners/Department from making any appointment by
way of direct recruitment and that O.A. was disposed of
directing the department to take a decision on the proposal
pending with the Ministry to grant one time relaxation.
Pursuant to the said order, the Department has rejected the
proposal and initiated action to fill up further 277
vacancies and the same was challenged by filing an
application before the Tribunal. It is also stated that the
persons who had applied much later to some of the
applicants have been considered for such appointment, while
some of the applicants are waiting for appointment in
violation of the instructions issued in the letter dated
29.9.1989. The Tribunal, directed the Department to
consider the case of seniors, to be appointed, if their
juniors are appointed, based on the date of the application.
Aggrieved, some writ petitions have also been filed which
are also the subject matter in this batch of writ petitions.
9. The main core of the argument of the learned
Additional Solicitor General appearing for the writ
petitioners in all these writ petitions is that there are
well laid down rules regarding compassionate appointment
which stipulate that compassionate appointment will be made
to enable the family of the deceased employee to tide over
the financial crisis caused due to the death of the sole
breadwinner, who died leaving the family in penury and
without sufficient means of livelihood and such an
appointment shall be made only on regular basis and that too
if regular vacancy meant for that is available upto the
maximum of 5% of the vacancies and such an appointment is an
exception to general rule that appointment to public office
should be made on the basis of competitive merits and once
it is proved that in spite of the death of the breadwinner,
the family survived and substantial period is over, there is
no need to make appointment on compassionate ground at the
cost of the interests of several others ignoring the mandate
of Art.14 of the Constitution the Tribunal and the applicant
cannot have a choice to choose a post under the
compassionate ground appointments, without considering the
good intention of the writ petitioners to offer Grameen Dak
Sevaks to the applicants, even though the waitlist has been
cancelled, has wrongly allowed the application, which needs
upset by this Court.
10. On the contrary, the learned counsel appearing for
the respondents/applicants before the Tribunal would submit
that the Tribunal has considered all the facts and
circumstances of the case encircling the whole issue and has
correctly arrived at the conclusion to allow the
applications filed by the applicants and therefore, all
these writ petitions filed by the State are liable to be
dismissed and would pray to dismiss all the writ petitions.
11. In support of his contentions, the learned
Additional Solicitor General of India would cite the
following decisions:
1. HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD. vs. A.RADHIKA
THIRUMALAI [(1996) 6 SCC 394];
2. STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS vs. SAJAD AHMED MIR
[(2006) 5 SCC 766] and
3. UNION BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS vs.
M.T.LATHEESH [(2006) 7 SCC 350].
12. There is no quarrel with regard to the propositions
laid down therein by the Apex Court. But, in all these
matters, the applicants have crossed the stage, which is the
subject matter in all the above cited judgments in the sense
that all the applicants were selected and approved for a
posting on compassionate ground by a duly constituted
Selection Committee as per the procedure laid down and they
were also provided with necessary training by the Department
at its expenses in their training institutes and employed
them against leave vacancies and most of the applicants are
in employment continuously. Thus, the applicants in these
cases are not seeking compassionate appointment so as to
apply the norms prescribed by the Apex Court in the above
cited judgments, but all these applicants are seeking
regularization of their appointments pursuant to their
selection by the duly constituted Selection Committee and
still they continue in their services and therefore, it
cannot be said that these applicants are still in waiting
list. Therefore, these cases cannot, in no way, be compared
with the above cited cases and therefore, the ratio laid
down in the above cases by the learned Additional Solicitor
General does not come to the rescue of the case of the
Department/petitioners.
13. Admittedly, the Post of Grameena Dak Sevak is not a
civil post. As could be seen from Endt.No.B5/1-1/Rlgs,
dated 18.7.2002 issued by the Senior Superintendent of Post
Offices, Madurai Division, Madurai, Grameena Dak Seveaks
cannot be treated as Central Government Employees. Since
all the applicants were already offered appointments and
while circulating their candidature for appointment against
leave vacancies, the Department had indicated that their
services would be regularised against future vacancies, they
were under legitimate expectation that their services would
be regularised in future course of action since they were
already held to be suitable and qualified for such posts by
the duly constituted Selection Committee. Therefore, as has
been pleaded on the part of the applicants, they would have
definitely given up all their attempts to pursue other
options available for securing employment and by this time,
most of the applicants might have even been over-aged to
pursue any further post. Further, having allowed the
applicants to work for a number of years with the fond hope
of getting their posts regularized, now the Department
offers them a non-civil post like Grameena Dak Sevak lest to
vacate the post now they are occupying, which cannot at all
be appreciated. As has been rightly observed by the
Tribunal, the entire approach and the action of the
Department to offer the post of Grameena Dak Sevak to the
applicants is without any basis since the same is not at all
covered by the compassionate appointment.'
14. As has already been stated supra, all the
applicants have been selected by a duly constituted
Selection Committee and after after affording them the
necessary training, they were listed for regularization and
their services were also utilized against leave/short term
vacancies. Therefore, it cannot be said that the applicants
are in waiting list for compassionate ground appointment,
which stage they have already crossed.
15. Pursuant to our direction to file a statement
showing as to how many approved candidates for the post of
postman etc. are waiting for appointment and how many were
absorbed in regular vacancies between the period 1989 and
2001 and also to furnish the details regarding the
recruitment conducted between 1989 and 2001 and how many
regular vacancies have been filled up during the said
recruitment, the writ petitioners have filed a statement
stating that of the 622 candidates approved for
compassionate appointment in Tamil Nadu Circle, 89
candidates have been appointed as Grameena Dak Sevaks and
the remaining 533 candidate who have been offered Grameena
Dak Sevaks posts have not come forward to accept the same
and have chosen to seek legal remedy for compassionate
appointment before the Court and since there are no
vacancies under 5% quota for compassionate appointment,
waiting list has been abolished by the Government and the
wait listed candidates are eligible for Grameena Dak Sevak
posts according to their willingness and eligibility as on
date; that apart from them, 600 fresh applications from the
year 2000 to 2005 have been received from the Units/Regions
of Tamil Nadu Circle seeking compassionate appointment and
these fresh applications have been processed and kept ready
for submission to the Circle Relaxation Committee, but
Circle Relaxation Committee could not be convened due to the
matter being subjudice before the Court.
16. For the said note submitted by the Department, a
strong and forcible reply note has been submitted by the
respondents/applicants stating that the Department has
omitted to indicate the number of direct recruitment
vacancies sought to be filled up for the year 2006 in Postal
Assistant/Sorting Assistant category and the number of
direct recruitment vacancies arising year wise is not total
number of direct recruitment vacancies but denotes only
1/3rd of the same, since there is a ban on direct
recruitment from the year 2000. Since 5% quota has to be
calculated on the basis of the total direct recruitment
vacancies arising for that year and not on the reduced
number of vacancies after applying the ban, the number of
direct recruitment vacancies arising year wise as shown by
the Department should be multiplied by three to arrive at
the total number of direct recruitment vacancies for that
year.
17. For the sake of convenience and better
appreciation, the details furnished by the petitioners and
the respondents are extracted in tabular columns below post-
wise
(a) Postal Assistants/Sorting Assistants:
Details as furnished by the Department Details furnished
by the
respondents
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Year No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of
vacancies vacancie persons candidatvacancie vacancie
under s under appointed es s under s for
Direct 5% quota under waiting direct compassi
Recruitme compassio for recruit- onate
nt nate compassi ment appointm
(Regular ground in o-nate (Regular ents 5%
vacancies 12% quota appoint-vacancie of
) upto 1994 ment s) regular
and 5% before vacancie
quota applying s
from 1995 ban
-------------------------------------------------------------
2000-01 160 8 -- -- 480 24
2002 160 8 -- -- 480 24
2003 120 6 -- -- 360 18
2004 60 3 -- -- 180 9
2005 320 16 -- -- 960 48
2006 235 12 -- -- 705 35
TOTAL 1055 53 -- -- 3165 158
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(b) Postman/Mail Guard
Details as furnished by the Department Details furnished
by the
respondents
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Year No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of
vacancies vacancie persons candidatvacancie vacancie
under s under appointed es s under s for
Direct 5% quota under waiting direct compassi
Recruitme compassio for recruit- onate
nt nate compassi ment appointm
(Regular ground in o-nate (Regular ents 5%
vacancies 12% quota appoint-vacancie of
) upto 1994 ment s) regular
and 5% before vacancie
quota applying s
from 1995 ban
-------------------------------------------------------------
2000-01 -- -- -- -- -- --
2002 40 2 -- -- 120 6
2003 60 3 -- -- 180 9
2004 40 2 -- -- 120 6
2005 120 6 -- -- 360 18
TOTAL 260 13 -- -- 780 39
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(c) Group D/Mailman:
Details as furnished by the Department Details furnished
by the
respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------
Year No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of No.of
vacancies vacancie persons candidatvacancie vacancie
under s under appointed es s under s for
Direct 5% quota under waiting direct compassi
Recruitme compassio for recruit- onate
nt nate compassi ment appointm
(Regular ground in o-nate (Regular ents 5%
vacancies 12% quota appoint-vacancie of
) upto 1994 ment s) regular
and 5% before vacancie
quota applying s
from 1995 ban
-------------------------------------------------------------
2000-01 80 4 -- -- 240 12
2002 40 2 -- -- 120 6
2003 40 2 -- -- 120 6
2004 20 1 -- -- 60 3
2005 160 8 -- -- 480 24
TOTAL 340 17 -- -- 1020 51
-------------------------------------------------------------
18. Thus, from the note submitted by the Department and
the reply note submitted by the respondents/applicants we
are able to understand that there are sufficient number of
vacancies in the Department to absorb the applicants into
the services of the Department.
19. The Tribunal, has considered all the facts and
circumstances of the case in their proper perspective,
applying the correct proposition of law on the subject and
has arrived at a correct conclusion to direct the Department
to consider the applicants for regularisation against
regular vacancies in which we are unable to find any
illegality or perversity in approach calling for our
interference under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Therefore, all these writ petitions fail and they are liable
to be dismissed.
In the result, all the writ petitions are dismissed
confirming the orders passed by the Tribunal. The
petitioners are directed to regularise the services of the
applicants before the Tribunal against regular vacancies in
the grade of Postal Assistants/Postman/Grade-D posts as per
the normal rules and orders governing compassionate ground
appointments within three months from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order.
No costs. Consequently, all the connected Miscellaneous
Petitions are closed.
Rao
To
The Registrar,
Central Administrative Tribunal,
Chennai.
[PRV/10635]
MADRAS HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ON RRR CANDIDATES CASE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.6.2007
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DHARMARAO ELIPE
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU
W.P.Nos.38990 of 2002,
2832 to 2835 of 2003, 9996 of 2003, 10059 of 2003, 30188 of
2003, 30345 of 2003, 34623 of 2003,
2567 of 2004, 2711 of 2004, 2750 of 2004, 2762 of 2004, 3003
of 2004, 3004 of 2004, 3766 of 2004, 3767 of 2004, 3810 of
2004, 4163 of 2004, 4164 of 2004, 4172 of 2004, 4940 of
2004, 4986 of 2004, 5132 of 2004, 6369 of 2004, 6424 of
2004, 11367 of 2004, 21433 of 2004,
22944 of 2004, & 19967 of 2005,
AND
W.P.M.P.Nos.58153 of 2002,
3542 to 3545 of 2003, 12665 of 2003, 12760 of 2003, 36870 of
2003, 37066 of 2003, 42057 of 2003,
2934 of 2004, 3142 of 2004, 3222 of 2004, 3239 of 2004, 3537
of 2004, 3539 of 2004, 4428 of 2004, 4430 of 2004, 4481 of
2004, 4901 of 2004, 4903 of 2004, 4912 of 2004, 5771 of
2004, 5819 of 2004, 7525 of 2004, 7608 of 2004, 13392 of
2004, 25916 of 2004, 27754 of 2004,
21748 of 2005
AND
W.V.M.P.No.2067 of 2006
W.P.No.38990 of 2002:
1. Union of India,
The Chief Postmaster General
Tamil Nadu Circle
Chennai 2
2. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices
Chennai City South Division
Chennai. ..Petitioners
Vs
1. The Central Administrative Tribunal
City Civil Court Buildings
Chennai 104.
2. M.Nallavan ..Respondents
W.P.No.38990 of 2002 has been filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of
Certiorari to call for the records in O.A.No.1131 of 2001 on
the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras and
quash the order dated 28.3.2002.
===============================================================================
For petitioners in all the W.Ps. :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.V.T.Gopalan, Addl.Solilcitor General for M/s.S.Yashwanth, M.Devadoss,
M.Dhamodharan, A.Rajendran, G.Nanmaran, K.L.Nandakumar, Sudharshan
Sundar, Sunita Kumari, P.Chandrasekaran & K.Kannan, all Central Govt.
Standing Counsel
===============================================================================
For R.3 & R7 in WP.10059/2003, For R2, R3, R5, R8, R9, R11 to R42 in
WP.9996/03
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.Vijay Narayanan, S.C. for M/s.R.Parthiban
===============================================================================
For R.1 in W.P.2567/2004, For R.1 in WP.3004/2004 For R.1 to R.4, R.7 to 21 in
WP.4172/2004, For R.1 in WP.3003/2004, For R.1 in 2762/2004, For R.3 to R6,
R8 to 10 & 15 in WP.6424/2004 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.Vijay Narayanan, S.C. for M/s.Karthikmukundan
===============================================================================
For R.1 in W.P.34623/2003 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Ms.R.Vaigai
===============================================================================
For R.1 in W.P.30188/2003, For R.2 in WP.11367/2004 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.P.Rajendran
===============================================================================
For R.1 in WP.4163/2004, For R.1 in WP.3810/2004, For R.1 in WP.4940/2004,
For R.2 in WP.38990/2002, For R.1 in WP.4986/2004, For R.2 in
WP.22944/2004, For R.2 in WP.2832 to 2835/2003 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.R.Malaichamy
===============================================================================
For R.1 in WP.2711/2004, WP.3766/2004, R.1 in W.P.3766/2004, for R.1 in
WP.4164/2004, For R.1 in WP.6369/2004, For R1, R.2, R.7, R11 & R.13 to R.16
In WP.6424/2004, For R.2 in WP.21433/2004, for R.5 & R6 in WP.4172/2004 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
No appearance
===============================================================================
For R.1 & R.2 in WP.4986/2004 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.V.Vijayshankar
===============================================================================
For R.1 in W.P.19967/2005 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.A.Arokiadoss
===============================================================================
For R.2 to R.22 in W.P.2832/2003 :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Mr.M.Radhakrishnan
===============================================================================
COMMON ORDER
DHARMARAO ELIPE, J.
Since all the matters are inextricably connected with each other, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2. The applicants before the Tribunal, who are the respondents herein, are all the dependents of Group-C and Group-D Staff of the Postal Department, who died in harness or retired voluntarily on medical grounds and they all have been approved for appointment on compassionate grounds in Group-C and Group-D posts. They all are working in various leave vacancies and short term vacancies. Since number of vacancies are lying vacant, their services are being utililzed for leave vacancies and thus they are serving without any break in service. The applicants were awaiting appointment in regular posts and were also imparted clerical training by the Department itself. After the judgment of the Apex Court in UMESH KUMAR NAGPAL vs. STATE OF HARYANA [(1994) 4 SCC 138], fixing the number of vacancies to be filled up by compassionate ground appointment as 5%, the Chief Post Master General, Tamil Nadu circle, issued a letter on 28.5.2001, seeking willingness in writing for consideration for appointment on compassionate grounds by other Ministries/Department from the candidates approved for compassionate appointment, who could not be given employment in the petitioner Department since they can also be absorbed in other Government Departments. Accordingly, all the applicants have submitted their willingness giving a choice of departments in which they prefer to be appointed on regular basis.
3. While things stood thus, the Ministry of Communications, Union of India, by the orders dated 25.7.2001 and 4.1.2002, impugned before the Tribunal, has taken a decision that any maintenance of the waiting list of approved candidates for compassionate appointment should be discontinued immediately and since the waiting list has been disposed, this may cause hardship to the approved candidates and in consideration of these aspects, a decision was taken to consider such wait listed candidates for vacancies in the post of Extra Departmental Staff. Based on the said letter,
the Chief Post Master General, Tamil Nadu Circle, has issued a letter on 6.8.2001 to various Post Masters seeking a list of vacancies in the Extra Departmental Staff. Aggrieved, the applicants have filed a batch of Original Applications before the Tribunal praying to set aside the letter dated 25.7.2001 of the Ministry of Communications, Union of India and to direct the Department to appoint the applicants as Postal Assistants within a time limit.
4. The writ petitioners/Department filed a common counter before the Tribunal stating that the compassionate appointment cases are considered by the Circle Selection Committee, constituted in accordance with instructions of Directorate's Letter No.24-269/87-SPB 1 dated 24.9.1989 on merits; that as per the scheme of compassionate appointment circulated by the Department of Personnel & Training OM No.14014/6/94-Estt (D) dated 9.10.1998, it has been clearly mentioned at para 7(f) that if sufficient vacancies are not available in any particular office to accommodate the persons in the waiting list for compassionate appointment, it is open to the administrative Ministry/Department/Office to take up the matter with other Ministries/Departments/Offices of the Government of India to provide at an early date appointment on compassionate grounds to those in the waiting list; the Supreme Court has ruled in the cases of HIMACHAL ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
vs. DINESH KUMAR [JT 1996(5) SC 319] and HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED vs. SMT.A.RADHIKA THIRUMALAI [JT 1996 (9) SC 197] that appointment on compassionate grounds can be made only if a vacancy is available for that purpose.
5. It is further submitted that by OM.No.14014/23/99-Estt(d) dated 3.12.1999, it was further clarified by Department of Personnel and Training that the Committee for
considering a request for appointment on compassionate ground should also take into account the position regarding availability of vacancy for such appointment for a really
deserving case and only if vacancy meant for appointment on compassionate grounds are available within a year, that too within the ceiling of 5% mentioned, such cases should be approved; that the quota for compassionate appointment was reduced to 5% as per the decision of the Government of India communicated in Department of Posts letter No.24-170/94-SPB I dated 11.12.1995 with the result number of candidates selected for compassionate appointment are kept in the waiting list; that the proposal made by the Department of Posts to the Department of Personnel and Training to relax the 5% limit in order to accommodate the approved candidates kept in the waiting list was also turned down by the Department of Personnel and Training citing the Supreme Court judgment in U.K.Nagpal's case, cited supra, vide OM NO.42012/4/2000-Estt (d) dated 24.11.2000; that the Department of Posts had to discontinue the maintenance of the waiting list of approved candidates for compassionate appointment on the basis of Ministry of Personnel D.O.P.&T OM No.42012/4/2000-Estt (D) dated 24.11.2000 communicated in DG Posts letter No.24-1/99-SPB-I, dated 8.2.2001.
6. It is further submitted that as on date, all the approved candidates already in the waiting list were asked to express their willingness for consideration for appointment by other Ministries, however, it was subsequently found by the Nodal Ministry that the chances for absorption in the Ministries are remote and that there are also not enough vacancies; that keeping this in view, it was felt that an opportunity can be given to such wait-listed candidates who are waiting for some time to be considered for vacant posts of Grameen Dak Sevaks, if they are willing and eligible for the post and hence the Director General (Posts) instructed the Postal circles to offer Grameen Dak Sevaks vacancies to dependents of regular employees (Grade C and Grade D) who are already approved for appointment on compassionate grounds and whose names are kept in the waiting list for want of regular departmental vacancies under compassionate appointment quota as on 8.2.2001; that there is no obligation on the part of the approved candidates kept in the waiting list to accept the offer of appointment as Grameen Dak Sevaks and therefore, there is no arbitrariness in the Scheme of offering Grameen Dak Sevak post to the candidates as their willingness have been called for and they have not been forced to work as Gameen Dak Sevaks; that the averment that there are approximately 1,500 vacancies in the posts of Postal Assistants cadre is not correct and there are only 505 vacancies in the Postal Assistant cadre for 2001 out of which 50% is to be filled up under Direct Recruitment; as appointments have already been made every year upto 1999 in the 5% quota of the compassionate appointments, and the candidates considered over and above the prescribed quota were kept in waiting list anticipating chances of more vacancies and when the chances are remote, it was decided to offer them Grameen Dak Sevak posts taking into consideration the hardship faced by them.
7. Since the Tribunal, has quashed the impugned orders dated 25.7.2001 and 4.1.2002 and directed the Department to consider the case of the applicants for regularization against the regular vacancies in the grade of Postal Assistants/Postman/Grade 'C' or Grade 'D' posts as per the normal rules and orders governing compassionate ground
appointments, the Department has come forward to file these writ petitions and obtained orders of interim stay.
8. In the meanwhile, there was a proposal to grant one time relaxation to accommodate all the persons included in the waiting list . Before a decision could be taken on this proposal at the Headquarters, the Chief Post Master General, Tamil Nadu Circle had issued a notification to fill up 146 vacancies by direct recruitment and some of the applicants have filed O.A.No.693 of 2004 for a direction to forbear the writ petitioners/Department from making any appointment by way of direct recruitment and that O.A. was disposed of directing the department to take a decision on the proposal pending with the Ministry to grant one time relaxation. Pursuant to the said order, the Department has rejected the proposal and initiated action to fill up further 277 vacancies and the same was challenged by filing an application before the Tribunal. It is also stated that the persons who had applied much later to some of the applicants have been considered for such appointment, while some of the applicants are waiting for appointment in violation of the instructions issued in the letter dated 29.9.1989. The Tribunal, directed the Department to consider the case of seniors, to be appointed, if their juniors are appointed, based on the date of the application. Aggrieved, some writ petitions have also been filed which are also the subject matter in this batch of writ petitions.
9. The main core of the argument of the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the writ petitioners in all these writ petitions is that there are well laid down rules regarding compassionate appointment which stipulate that compassionate appointment will be made to enable the family of the deceased employee to tide over the financial crisis caused due to the death of the sole breadwinner, who died leaving the family in penury and without sufficient means of livelihood and such an appointment shall be made only on regular basis and that too if regular vacancy meant for that is available upto the maximum of 5% of the vacancies and such an appointment is an exception to general rule that appointment to public office should be made on the basis of competitive merits and once it is proved that in spite of the death of the breadwinner, the family survived and substantial period is over, there is no need to make appointment on compassionate ground at the cost of the interests of several others ignoring the mandate of Art.14 of the Constitution the Tribunal and the applicant cannot have a choice to choose a post under the compassionate ground appointments, without considering the good intention of the writ petitioners to offer Grameen Dak Sevaks to the applicants, even though the waitlist has been cancelled, has wrongly allowed the application, which needs upset by this Court.
10. On the contrary, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents/applicants before the Tribunal would submit that the Tribunal has considered all the facts and
circumstances of the case encircling the whole issue and has correctly arrived at the conclusion to allow the applications filed by the applicants and therefore, all these writ petitions filed by the State are liable to be dismissed and would pray to dismiss all the writ petitions.
11. In support of his contentions, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India would cite the following decisions:
1. HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD. vs. A.RADHIKA THIRUMALAI [(1996) 6 SCC 394];
2. STATE OF J&K AND OTHERS vs. SAJAD AHMED MIR [(2006) 5 SCC 766] and
3. UNION BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS vs. M.T.LATHEESH [(2006) 7 SCC 350].
12. There is no quarrel with regard to the propositions laid down therein by the Apex Court. But, in all these matters, the applicants have crossed the stage, which is the subject matter in all the above cited judgments in the sense that all the applicants were selected and approved for a posting on compassionate ground by a duly constituted Selection Committee as per the procedure laid down and they were also provided with necessary training by the Department at its expenses in their training institutes and employed them against leave vacancies and most of the applicants are in employment continuously. Thus, the applicants in these cases are not seeking compassionate appointment so as to apply the norms prescribed by the Apex Court in the above cited judgments, but all these applicants are seeking regularization of their appointments pursuant to their selection by the duly constituted Selection Committee and still they continue in their services and therefore, it cannot be said that these applicants are still in waiting list. Therefore, these cases cannot, in no way, be compared with the above cited cases and therefore, the ratio laid down in the above cases by the learned Additional Solicitor General does not come to the rescue of the case of the Department/petitioners.
13. Admittedly, the Post of Grameena Dak Sevak is not a civil post. As could be seen from Endt.No.B5/1-1/Rlgs, dated 18.7.2002 issued by the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Madurai Division, Madurai, Grameena Dak Seveaks cannot be treated as Central Government Employees. Since all the applicants were already offered appointments and while circulating their candidature for appointment against leave vacancies, the Department had indicated that their services would be regularised against future vacancies, they were under legitimate expectation that their services would be regularised in future course of action since they were already held to be suitable and qualified for such posts by the duly constituted Selection Committee. Therefore, as has been pleaded on the part of the applicants, they would have definitely given up all their attempts to pursue other options available for securing employment and by this time, most of the applicants might have even been over-aged to pursue any further post. Further, having allowed the applicants to work for a number of years with the fond hope of getting their posts regularized, now the Department offers them a non-civil post like Grameena Dak Sevak lest to vacate the post now they are occupying, which cannot at all be appreciated. As has been rightly observed by the Tribunal, the entire approach and the action of the Department to offer the post of Grameena Dak Sevak to the applicants is without any basis since the same is not at all covered by the compassionate appointment.'
14. As has already been stated supra, all the applicants have been selected by a duly constituted Selection Committee and after affording them the necessary training, they were listed for regularization and their services were also utilized against leave/short term vacancies. Therefore, it cannot be said that the applicants are in waiting list for compassionate ground appointment, which stage they have already crossed.
15. Pursuant to our direction to file a statement showing as to how many approved candidates for the post of postman etc. are waiting for appointment and how many were
absorbed in regular vacancies between the period 1989 and 2001 and also to furnish the details regarding the recruitment conducted between 1989 and 2001 and how many regular vacancies have been filled up during the said recruitment, the writ petitioners have filed a statement stating that of the 622 candidates approved for
compassionate appointment in Tamil Nadu Circle, 89 candidates have been appointed as Grameena Dak Sevaks and the remaining 533 candidate who have been offered Grameena Dak Sevaks posts have not come forward to accept the same and have chosen to seek legal remedy for compassionate appointment before the Court and since there are no vacancies under 5% quota for compassionate appointment, waiting list has been abolished by the Government and the wait listed candidates are eligible for Grameen Dak Sevak posts according to their willingness and eligibility as on date; that apart from them, 600 fresh applications from the year 2000 to 2005 have been received from the Units/Regions of Tamil Nadu Circle seeking compassionate appointment and these fresh applications have been processed and kept ready for submission to the Circle Relaxation Committee, but Circle Relaxation Committee could not be convened due to the matter being subjudice before the Court.
16. For the said note submitted by the Department, a strong and forcible reply note has been submitted by the respondents/applicants stating that the Department has omitted to indicate the number of direct recruitment vacancies sought to be filled up for the year 2006 in Postal Assistant/Sorting Assistant category and the number of direct recruitment vacancies arising year wise is not total number of direct recruitment vacancies but denotes only 1/3rd of the same, since there is a ban on direct recruitment from the year 2000. Since 5% quota has to be calculated on the basis of the total direct recruitment vacancies arising for that year and not on the reduced number of vacancies after applying the ban, the number of direct recruitment vacancies arising year wise as shown by the Department should be multiplied by three to arrive at
the total number of direct recruitment vacancies for that year.
17. For the sake of convenience and better appreciation, the details furnished by the petitioners and the respondents are extracted in tabular columns below post-wise
(a) Postal Assistants/Sorting Assistants:
(a) Postal Assistants/Sorting Assistants:
Details as furnished by the Department Details furnished
by the
respondents
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Year No. of No. of No, of No, of No, of No, of
Vacancies Vacancies persons candidates vacancies vacancies
Under under appointed waiting under for
Direct 5% Quota under for direct compassio
Recruitment compassio compassio recruit- nate
( Regular nate nate ment appointm
vacancies) ground in appoint- (Regular ents 5%
12% Quota ment vacancies) of
upto 1994 before regular
and 5% applying vacancies
quota ban
from 1995
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000-01 160 8 -- -- 480 24
2002 160 8 -- -- 480 24
2003 120 6 -- -- 360 18
2004 60 3 -- -- 180 9
2005 320 16 -- -- 960 48
s
2006 235 12 -- -- 705 35
TOTAL 1055 53 -- -- 3165 158
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(b) Postman/Mail Guard
Details as furnished by the Department Details furnished
by the
respondents
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Year No. of No. of No, of No, of No, of No, of
Vacancies Vacancies persons candidates vacancies vacancies
Under under appointed waiting under for
Direct 5% Quota under for direct compassio
Recruitment compassio compassio recruit- nate
( Regular nate nate ment appointm
vacancies) ground in appoint- (Regular ents 5%
12% Quota ment vacancies) of
upto 1994 before regular
and 5% applying vacancies
quota ban
from 1995
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000-01 -- -- -- -- -- --
2002 40 2 -- -- 120 6
2003 60 3 -- -- 180 9
2004 40 2 -- -- 120 6
2005 120 6 -- -- 360 18
TOTAL 260 13 -- -- 780 39
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(c) Group D/Mailman:
Details as furnished by the Department Details furnished
by the
respondents
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year No. of No. of No, of No, of No, of No, of
Vacancies Vacancies persons candidates vacancies vacancies
Under under appointed waiting under for
Direct 5% Quota under for direct compassio
Recruitment compassio compassio recruit- nate
( Regular nate nate ment appointm
vacancies) ground in appoint- (Regular ents 5%
12% Quota ment vacancies) of
upto 1994 before regular
and 5% applying vacancies
quota ban
from 1995
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2000-01 80 4 -- -- 240 12
2002 40 2 -- -- 120 6
2003 40 2 -- -- 120 6
2004 20 1 -- -- 60 3
2005 160 8 -- -- 480 24
TOTAL 340 17 -- -- 1020 51
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Thus, from the note submitted by the Department and the reply note submitted by the respondents/applicants we are able to understand that there are sufficient number of Vacancies in the Department to absorb the applicants into the services of the Department.
19. The Tribunal, has considered all the facts and circumstances of the case in their proper perspective, applying the correct proposition of law on the subject and has arrived at a correct conclusion to direct the Department to consider the applicants for regularisation against regular vacancies in which we are unable to find any illegality or perversity in approach calling for our interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. Therefore, all these writ petitions fail and they are liable to be dismissed.
In the result, all the writ petitions are dismissed confirming the orders passed by the Tribunal. The petitioners are directed to regularise the services of the applicants before the Tribunal against regular vacancies in the grade of Postal Assistants/Postman/Grade-D posts as per the normal rules and orders governing compassionate ground appointments within three months from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order.
No costs. Consequently, all the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
Rao
To
The Registrar,
Central Administrative Tribunal,
Chennai.
[PRV/10635]