DIRECTOR Vs. H T TRIPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this petition, the petitioners have sought for quashing and setting aside the order dated 28/02/2001, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, in O.A. No. 121 of 2000 and for quashing and setting aside the orders dated 27th February, 1998 and 10/02/2000, changing the date of promotion of the applicants, respondents herein and ordering recovery of the amount already paid to them.

(2.) On account of the stagnation of employees on the same post having no chance of promotion to any higher post, Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) Scheme was granted for promotion/upgradation to the Post and Telegraph employees vide communication dated 17.12.83 with effect from 30th November, 1983. This Scheme provides that the eligible official belonging to basic Grades in Group "C" or Group "D" of the Department, who had completed 16 years of service in that grade to be placed in the next higher grade. By the TBOP Scheme, the Competent Authorities are required to identify the officials belonging to the cadres covered under the Scheme, who were to complete 16 years of service upto 31st March of the next year and the Departmental Promotion Committee would be convened before 30th June to consider the fitness of the officials completing 16 years of service in that grade during the year. The employees who complete 16 years of service on the date later than that of convening of the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee, will be placed on the approved list and will be promoted to the next higher scale of pay immediately on completion of 16 years of service. After introduction of TBOP Scheme, the staff Union demanded a Second Time Bound Promotion and that was also on completion of 26 years of service in the basic grade. That was not acceptable in terms of the proposal to the Respondent No. 1. However, the Government accepted the need of BCR Scheme under which the employees were granted benefit of the Scheme on completion of 26 years of service. This Scheme was granted to provide promotional opportunity to eligible employees on the basis of functional justification with the object to utilise their services comparatively with higher responsibilities and better skills vide communication dated 11.10.91 with effect from 1.10.91.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The crucial point in the present case is as to whether Biennial Cadre Review Scheme (BCR Scheme) is applicable as soon as 26 years of service of the employee is over or from the date on which the review is held for giving upgraded post to the employee. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that there was a demand of the Union that like 16 years' Scheme namely, Time Bound One Promotion Scheme (TBOP Scheme), benefit of BCR Scheme should be given in the same line as 16 years' Scheme provides. As soon as 26 years' service is over, but the demand was not acceptable in view of the provision made in 1st para of the Scheme wherein it is mentioned that after careful consideration, it has been decided that this concept is not acceptable for implementation of the BCR Scheme. Rules have been framed and that Scheme has been made applicable from 3 1/12/1991 and the benefits are given to the concerned employees after the review conducted for eligible officials covering the period from 1.1.92 to 3 1/12/1993 who have completed 26 years of service or more on the crucial date. The crucial date, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners are, the dates of review, namely 1.7.92, 1.1.93 and 1.7.93. By that review, post will be created and the benefits of the Scheme will be given from the date of the review as the post has to be identified on functional justification.