UNION OF INDIA REP BY CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL, CHENNAI Vs. REGISTRAR, CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed by the Union of India, rep. by the Chief Post Master General, Tamil Nadu Circle and the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Thanjavur Division, against the Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, Chennai and S.Sudhakar, praying for a writ of certiorari calling for the records of the impugned order dated 18.08.2016 in O.A.No.310/1587 of 2015 on the file of the First Respondent and to quash the same.

(2.) The Applicant in O.A.No.1587 of 2015, S.Sudhakar(the 2nd respondent herein) is one of the two sons of late Shri M.Sivagnanam, Ex. Gramin Dak Sevaks(GDS). The late Shri M.Sivagnanam expired on 28.08.2013 while in service. Thereafter, his son S.Sudhakar made a request for appointment as Extra Departmental Agent/GDS on compassionate grounds. The application of Shri S.Sudhakar was examined by the Circle Relaxation Committee (CRC), which did not approve the application inter alia on the basis that the Second Respondent did not fulfill the minimum educational qualification. This decision was communicated to the Second Respondent by the Petitioners vide Letter No.BIII/RRR/01/2015, dated 14.08.2015. The Second Respondent challenged this communication by filing O.A.No.1587 of 2015 before the First Respondent. The case was heard by the First Respondent and by order dated 18.08.2016, O.A.No.1587 of 2015 was allowed. Consequently, the order dated 14.08.2015 of the Second Petitioner was quashed and the Petitioners herein were directed to reconsider the case of the Second Respondent/Applicant and grant him compassionate appointment, in the light of the letter of the Ministry of Communication and IT, Department of Posts No.17-17/2010-GDS, dated 17.12.2015, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The order dated 18.08.2016 of the First Respondent is impugned in this Writ Petition.

(3.) The Learned counsel for the Petitioners has raised two main grounds for consideration. The first is that the First Respondent had failed to consider the rules relating to appointment of GDS with regard to the prescribed educational qualifications for appointment on compassionate grounds and that the Second Respondent admittedly does not satisfy the educational qualification. In this connection, the learned counsel for the petitioners made a reference to paragraph Nos.3 to 5 of the additional affidavit of the petitioners dated 28.02.2019. In paragraph 3 of the said additional affidavit, the petitioners state that the Directorate vide Letter No.17-1/2017-GDS dated 30.05.2017 has issued guidelines for review of scheme for engagement of a dependent of deceased Gramin Dak Sevaks on compassionate grounds and that the above mentioned guidelines do not provide for relaxation to the basic educational qualifications prescribed for the GDS post for which the Second Respondent was considered. In specific terms, the letter of the Directorate, viz., letter No.17-39/6/2012-GDS dated 14.01.2015 is referred to and it is stated that the Secondary School Examination Pass Certificate issued by a recognized board of school education in India is mandatory for all approved categories of GDS as per Gramin Dak Sevaks(Conduct and Engagement) Rules 2011(the GDS Rules). It is also stated in the said additional affidavit that a widow of a deceased Government employee is entitled to exemption from educational qualification, provided the duties of the post can be performed without having the educational qualifications of middle standard prescribed in the Recruitment Rules. It is further pointed out in the additional affidavit that a clarification was requested for as to whether the exemption given to widows of deceased persons can be extended to other dependents/near relatives of deceased Extra Departmental Agents and that in response thereto it has been categorically clarified in Section XI of the GDS Rules that the relaxation is available only to the widow/widower of the deceased Extra Departmental Agents, provided the widow/widower is literate. The second ground of challenge relates to the alleged non-fulfillment of the Relative Merit Points(RMP) criterion by the Second Respondent but this ancillary ground was not the focus of the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner.