UNION OF INDIA Vs. M.DEVENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition has been filed by the Administration challenging the order dtd. 29/12/2020 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench in OA No.351/01286/2020, by which the direction was passed upon the petitioners to examine the claim of the respondent in the light of the decision rendered in OA No.167/ 2015 and OA No.1522/2013 and grant them the benefits at par with the similarly situated persons within three months from the date of the order.

(2.) The respondent/applicant was engaged on casual basis and on from 4/1/1995 which was extended from time to time. Subsequently, the service of the respondent/applicant was regularized with effect from the initial date of appointment at the pay scale of Rs.2250.003200/-. According to the respondent/applicant after the regularization of his service the respondent/applicant was paid all the service benefits accrued to him from the date of the initial appointment.

(3.) Indubitably, such appointment was made against an existing vacancy and after regularization of the casual service from the date of the initial appointment, the respondent/applicant was entitled under the pension scheme. Subsequently, the said order was modified to the extend that the respondent/applicant would be governed under the new pension scheme and not under the old pension scheme. Even if held so that the casual service was regularized from the date of the initial appointment as per the rule in force. The respondent/applicant felt aggrieved by such modified order and made a representation to the authority that his casual service prior to the regularization should be counted for the purpose of availing the benefit under the said scheme when the similarly circumstanced persons have already been granted the benefit. The said representation was disposed of with a finding that the casual service prior to the regular appointment would not be counted for any purpose.