Writ Petition No. 10464 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13154-DB WP No. 10464 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF WRIT PETITION NO. 10464 OF 2024 (S-CAT) BETWEEN:
Legal Reasoning
status. There is no dispute that the petitioners herein were appointed as MTS on different dates, i.e., 13.06.2011, 15.09.2011 and 18.11.2012. According to him, in terms of the instructions issued by DOP and T under Rule 14 of the CCS (Pension) Rules (for short 'the Rules'), which - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13154-DB WP No. 10464 of 2024 defines qualifying service, the Petitioners are entitled to the benefit of Old Pension Scheme though they have been made permanent after 01.01.2004. Rule 14 of the Rules reads as under: Rule 14. Conditions subject to which service qualifies (1) The 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. (2) For the purposes of sub-rule (1), the expression "Service" means service under the Government and paid by that Government from the Consolidated Fund of India or a Local Fund administered by that Govern- ment but does not include service in a non-pensionable establishment unless such service is treated as qualifying service by that Government. service (3) In the case of a Government servant belonging to a State Government, who is permanently transferred to a service or post to which these rules apply, the continuous the State Government in an officiating or temporary capacity, if any, followed without interruption by substantive appointment, or the continuous service rendered under that Government in an officiating or temporary capacity, as the case may be, shall qualify: rendered under Provided that nothing contained in this sub-rule shall apply to any such Government servant who is appointed otherwise than by deputation to a service or post to which these rules apply. Rule 14(2-A): Casual Labourers with temporary status - Clarification regarding contribution to GPF and Pension under the old pension scheme. Undersigned is - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:13154-DB WP No. 10464 of 2024 directed to refer to this Department's O.M. No. 51016/2/90-Estt. (C), dated the 10th September, 1993 vide which a scheme for grant of temporary status to the casual employees was framed. The scheme applied to those casual labourers who were in employment on the date of the issue of the OM and had rendered one year of continued service in Central Government Offices, which meant that they must have been engaged for a period of at least 240 days (206 days in the case of offices observing 5 days week). The scheme did not apply to Departments of Telecom and Posts and Ministry of Railways. Rule 14(2-B): Casual labourers with temporary status - Clarification regarding contribution of GPF and the Old Pension Scheme. The Pension under undersigned is directed to refer to this Department's OM of even number, dated the 26th February, 2016 on the above subject and to say that some references have been received in this Department from various Ministries / Departments seeking a clarification with regard to the Para. 7 of the referred OM.. 2. The OM was issued in consultation with Department of Expenditure and the Department of Pension and PW. It was clarified vide that OM that this Department's O.M., dated the 26th April, 2004 had been quashed in a series of Orders/Judgments. The OM, dated the 26th February, 2016 restores the provisions of the Scheme as it existed prior to the OM, dated the 26th April, 2004. The benefit of GPF and Old Pension Scheme is applicable to all those casual labourers who are covered under the Scheme of the 10th September, 1993 even if they have been regularized on or after 1- 1-2004. 3. He qualifies his submission by stating that because of the operation of the scheme notified by the Department of - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:13154-DB WP No. 10464 of 2024 Posts, the petitioners were entitled to be declared as having temporary status and resultantly, even if the petitioners were appointed on regular basis to MTS after 01.01.2004 when the New Pension Scheme was notified, they shall be governed by the old Pension Scheme. 4. We are unable to accept the submission made by Mr.Kulkarni for the simple reason though Petitioners were regulated for the grant of temporary status by the Scheme notified by the Department of Posts, but they were not conferred with the Temporary Status Scheme till their appointment as MTS. 5. In the absence of being conferred the temporary status, the petitioners having been appointed as MTS only in the years 2011 and 2014, it is New Pension Scheme which shall be applicable to the petitioners. The plea of Mr.Kulkarni that the petitioners fulfil the grant of temporary status is concerned, it is too late for the Petitioners to contend so. They should have approached the Tribunal for getting such status in their favour - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:13154-DB WP No. 10464 of 2024 immediately after 1993. In the absence of they being conferred the temporary status, their appointment for all purposes must be treated to be an appointment after 01.01.2004 when the New Pension Scheme was notified which benefit has been granted to them. 6. We do not see any merit in the petition. The same is dismissed. Sd/- (V KAMESWAR RAO) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE BNV CT: BHK/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26
Arguments
1. SRI. JAGANNATH DEVADIGA, S/O SRI. MONAPPA, AGED 61 YEARS, MAIL GUARD (GROUP 'C') (RETIRED) SUB RECORD OFFICE, RMS 'Q' DIVISION, MANGALURU. R/A 1-29-2404, JBT HOIGE BAIL, MANGALURU - 575 006. 2. SMT. LEELA, Digitally signed by K G RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka 58 YEARS, W/O SRI. NARAYANA K, MTS GROUP 'C', SUB RECORD OFFICE, RMS 'Q' DIVISION, MANGALURU, R/A 4-1-54, VIVEKANAGAR BALLAL BAGH, MANGALURU - 575 003. 3. SRI. K. SUNDARA, 60 YEARS, S/O LATE SRI. BALLU, MTS GROUP 'C' (RETIRED), SUB RECORD OFFICE, RMS 'Q' DIVISION, MANGALURU, - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13154-DB WP No. 10464 of 2024 R/A 2-169/2, SANTHOSH NAGAR, MUNNURU, D.K. DISTRICT - 575 017. (BY SRI. P.A. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, DAK BHAVAN, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2. CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL, SOUTH KARNATAKA REGION, BENGALURU - 560 001. 3. SUPERINTENDENT RMS 'Q' DIVISION, BENGALURU - 560 026. (BY SRI. B. PRAMOD, CGC) …PETITIONERS …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO a) ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT/ORDER/DIRECTION QUASHING THE ORDER DATED 31/01/2024 IN OA170/375/2021, ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY CAT BENGALURU BENCH, BENGALURU BY ALLOWING THE OA170/375/2021 AS PRAYED FOR AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13154-DB WP No. 10464 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V KAMESWAR RAO) This Writ Petition lays a challenge to the Order dated 31.01.2024 (in Original Application No.170/375/2021) of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal), whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the Original Application filed by the petitioners herein. The Original Application was filed before the Tribunal with the following prayers: a) To set aside the Order No. B-II/MTS/Digs dated 09-04-2018 (Annexure A-8) along with order no. SK/AP/16-7/RMS Q dated 05-04-2018 (Annexure A- 7), vide which their request for considering them to be covered under Old Pension Scheme instead of New Pension Scheme, has been rejected. b) Direct the respondents to consider the case of the applicants under Old Pension Scheme thereby counting their 50% of casual service from the date of the date of regularization as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and other consequent benefits. initial engagement their to - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13154-DB WP No. 10464 of 2024 c) Pass such other order or orders as this Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity. 2. The facts to be noted are that the petitioners herein were appointed as Part Time Casual Labourers in the year 1989. Subsequently, on 08.02.1999 and 03.01.2020, they have been engaged as Full Time Casual Labourers. The submission of Mr.P.A.Kulkarni, learned counsel for the petitioners is that in terms of the scheme notified by the Department of Posts for grant of Temporary status to casual labourers, the same stipulates, on completion of 240 days of engagement, they necessarily need be conferred the temporary status. According to him, certain benefits would enure to the casual labourers on their Permanent appointment if they are granted temporary