No.99-7/2017-Pension
Government Of India
Department of Posts
(Pension Section)
Government Of India
Department of Posts
(Pension Section)
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi – 110 001
1st February, 2017
New Delhi – 110 001
1st February, 2017
To
All Head(S) of Circles
Sub: Handling
Court cases on the issue of applicability of CCS (Pension) Rules instead
of NPS in respect of GDS appointed to regular departmental posts after
01-01-2004-reg.
Sir/Madam,
It has come tto notice that officials, who have been appointed on
regular basis after 01-01-2004 under New Pension Schemes have filed OAs
before Tribunals praying to cover their case under CCS (Pension) Rules,
1972 by treating them as old entrants. These cases are required to be
defended in Court vigilantly from preliminary stages since any adverse
directions of any court would cause harm to the interest of the
Department.
2. It is therefore considered appropriate to provide some of arguments/
observations, which can be uniformly placed before court for a rational
decision of the Court in any case on the issue. If any Tribunal has
already given decision for applying CCS (Pension) Rule only on the
consideration of GDS service performed prior to the cut off date,
appropriate appeal may invariably be filed without any further delay.
The grounds should include:
(a) The GDSs are holders of civil posts but are not regular Government
Servants. They are a separate cadre, outside the Government service,
existing only in the Department of Posts and formed with the primary
objective of providing postal services in the remote villages of the
county. They become departmental employee from the date of their regular
appointment. The Apex Court has established their status as civil posts
outside the regular civil services in the case of UOI P.K. Rajamma in
1977.
(b) Extra Departmental Agents (now called Gramin Dak Sevaks) were
specifically excluded from the application of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1957 (now
1965) vide MHA Notification No.SRO 609 dated 28-02-1957 at Serial (i)
of the list. With this exclusion, this category stands excluded from the
purview of term ‘Central Civil Service’ and ‘Central Civil Post’
defined under Rule 2 (c) and that of ‘Government Servant’ defined under
Rule 2(h)(i) of the said rules. Thus, holding of civil post outside the
regular civil service ipso facto means that Gramin Dak Sevaks are a
separate and distinct category confined to Department of Posts as
holders of civil post outside the regular civil service; which does not
fall under ‘Central Civil Service’ or ‘Central civil Post’ of
‘Government Servant.’ This is also supported by the fact that the
Government has not included this category in any of the classification
of Group A or B or C or D posts resultant to such exclusion. Further,
terms and conditions of their engagement laid down in Rule 3-A (v) of
GDS (conduct and Engagement) Rules do specify clearly that a Sevak shall
be outside the civil service of the Union.
(c) Gramin Dak Sevaks (GDSs) (earlier known as Extra Departmental Agents
(EDAs)) are exclusive to the Department of Posts and the Sevaks so
engaged are not required to perform duty beyond a maximum period of 5
hours in a day. GDS post is purely part time job with working hours
ranging from 3 to 5 hours and it is obligatory for the person to give an
undertaking that he/she has adequate source of livelihood for
himself/herself and family. Normally, the Central Government Employees
are eligible to serve the Government up to 60 years whereas GDSs are
retained up to 65 years of age.
(d) Right from the formation of the system of GDS, appointment of GDS to
Group D (regular post) is treated as direct recruitment and not as a
promotion. This is because, promotion exists only from like cadres and
GDS being outside the Government service cannot form a feederr cadre as
far as postman and other cadres are concerned. In a catena of judgments,
courts have observed that appointment as postman/GrD/MTS from EDA
cannott be termed as promotion as the post of postman/GrD/MTS etc and
EDA belong to two different services viz regular postal services and
Extra Departmental Service. The judgements of Full bench of Ernakulam
Bench of CAT in case of M.A.Mohanan Vs St SPO & Ors may be referred
to. Further, CAT Madras in OA No.785 of 2011 dated 28.04.2014 observed
that the terms and condition of their employment (of GDSs) are not
comparable to that of regulaar employees of the postal department or of
any other department for that matter. In OA No.170/01651/2015 filed by
Y.S.Manjunatha, CAT, Bangalore bench has observed that engagement of GDS
is not a regular government service and the service rendered as GDS
cannot be counted as regular government service to bring a person under
old pension scheme.
(e) In a recent judgement in CA Nos 90/2015 and 91/2015 dated 12.8.2016,
Hon’ble Supreme Court by referring the decisions of Apex Court in
C.C.Padmanabhan & Ors Vs Director of Public Instructions & Ors,
Union of India Vs Kameshwar Prasad and the Superintendent of Post
Offices & Ors Vs P.K.Rajamma, held that EDAs/GDSs are not in regular
service of the postal Department. The Apex Court concluded in the case
that selection of EDA or GDS to the post of postman under relevant
column of Recruitment Rules is only by way of ‘Direct Recruitment’ and
not by way of ‘Promotion’. Copy of judgement has already been circulated
to all circles by Staff branch vide theier letterr No.2-18/2016-SPB-I
dated 25.11.2016.
(f) Gramin Dak Sevaks are eligible to be considered for the posts of MTS
or Postman in conformity with statutory recruitment rules governing
these posts. The Department of Posts MTS Recruitment Rule also clarifies
that Gramin Dak Sewaks are holders of Civil Posts, but they are outside
the regular civil service due to which their appointment will be by
direct recruitment even when selecttion is on basis of
selection-cum-seniority. It also prescribes that on failing recruitment
from Gramin Dak Sewaks, the earmarked vacancies will be filled up by
direct recruitment from open market. Similar provisions are in the
postman and Mail Guard Recruitment Rules. Therefore, the GDS service
would have no consideration towards regular service and their
appointment in regular service could be only criterion forr determining
their placement in CCS (Pension) Rules/NPS. The GDS cannot said to be
feederr cadre for postman/Group D in view of provisions of the
Recruitment Rules.
(g) The provisions under Rule 13 of CCS (Pension) Rule, 1972 are also
relevant. It mentions that qualifying service of a Government Servant
shall commence from date he takes charge of the post to which is first
appointed either substantively or in an officiating or temporary
capacity provided that officiating or temporary service is followed
without interruption by substantive appointment. Since such applicants
were holding a non-governmental post on 01.01.2004 and they were
appointed to a Departmental Post after the cut-off date, as per
Government decision, NPS will be applicable in all such cases.
(h) Rule 14(1) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 mentions that ‘Service’ of a
Government servant shall not qualify unless his duties and pay are
regulated by the Government, or under conditions determined by the
Government. Under Rule 14 (2) further provides that ‘forr the purposes
of sub rule (1), the expression ‘Service’ means service under the
Government and paid by that Government from consolidated fund of India
or a local fund administered by that Government but does not include
service in a non-pensionable establishment unless such service is
treated as qualifying service by that Government. Extra Departmental
Agents are provided to be specifically excluded fromt he application of
pension under the GDS rules and the Government has also not provided
counting of a part of the service rendered by them in the capacity of
EDA/GDS on absorption to regular departmental posts.
(i) It is also added that in CA No.13675-13676/2015 in UOI & Others
Vss the Registrar & Ors, Hon’ble Supreme Court, considering the
rules governing GDS and the fact that GDS employees do not come under
the category of full time casual employee, has held that the directions
to the Department for formulation of scheme for giving some weightage to
GDS service to make good the shortfall in minimum qualifying service of
10 years in regular employment, ought not to have been passed by the
learned Tribunal and approved by the High court. The Apex court further
observed that the matter pertains to policy and involves financial
implications.
3. It is re-iterated that immediate action may be taken in all cases on
the issue and it should be ensured that the Court may be apprised of the
above facts. The Directorate may be kept informed of the
development/progress in each case on the issue. It has been observed in
the past that Department has lost many cases due to delayed action.
Therefore, it should be ensure that appropriate action should be taken
within prescribed timeline.
Yours faithfully,
(Smriti Sharan)
Deputy Director General (Estt.)
Deputy Director General (Estt.)
0 comments:
Post a Comment