SUNITY CHAKRABORTY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these petitioners have challenged the common order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench in OA no. 448 of 2012 and OA no. 449 of 2012 on 21st June, 2013.

(2.) The petitioner in WPCT no. 497 of 2013 Sunity Chakaraborty was appointed as a trained nurse on 20th August, 1975. The petitioner in WPCT no. 498 of 2013 Pratima Giri was appointed to the same post on 22nd November, 1975. Both the petitioners being trained nurses were initially appointed on an ad hoc basis against a substantive post which was sanctioned. They had fulfilled all the eligibility criteria and were recruited after completion of all the formalities, including an interview.

(3.) While working on an ad hoc basis they were granted the same facilities and were governed by the service conditions, which were applicable to the regular staff. They even subscribed for the General Provident Fund (hereinafter referred to as 'GPF'). The petitioners were regularised in service after six years on the approval of the railway authorities. The conditions of service and scale of pay along with the yearly increment were reckoned from their dates of initial absorption in service on an ad hoc basis. The petitioners were promoted twice during their tenure of service of more than 30 years. Sunity Chakraborty retired on superannuation on 31st March, 2009 on completion of more than 33 years of service whereas the other petitioner Pratima Giri retired on superannuation on 31st May, 2011 after completion of more than 35 years of service.