NAGARAJ DEVAGUNDI vs DEPARTMENT OF POSTS
- Court
- Central Administrative Tribunal
1
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.170/000565/2025
ORDER RESERVED ON: 12.10.2026
DATE OF ORDER: 22.10.2026
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. SANTOSH MEHRA ..MEMBER(A)
1. Sri. Nagaraj Devagundi,
Aged 57 years,
S/o Basavaraj,
Retired Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices (Hq),
Bidar Division,
Bidar: 585401,
Resident of: Near Hakkeri Math,
Haveri District,
Haveri: 581110 …...Applicant
(By Advocate, Shri P.A. Kulkarni)
Vs.
1. Union of India,
By its Secretary,
Ministry of Communications
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi: 110 001.
Phone No: 011-23096060
Mail id: [email protected]
2. Chief Post Master General
Palace Road,
Bengaluru: 560 001
Phone No: 08022258832
Mail id: [email protected]
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
2
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
3. General Manager (PA&F),
Karnataka Circle,
rd
3 Floor, GPO Building,
Bengaluru: 560 001
Phone No: 080 22850120
Mail id: [email protected]
4. Superintendent of Post Offices,
Bidar Division,
Bidar: 585401,
Phone No: 08482-225350
Mail id: [email protected] …..Respondents
(By Advocate, Shri H.R. Sreedhara)
O R D E R
Per: Hon’ble Shri Santosh Mehra ……Member(A)
Through this OA, the applicant has sought the following reliefs:
“(a) To hold that in terms of Rule 44 (1) of CCS (Pension) Rules
2021 applicant is entitled for fixation of his pension on the basis of
10 months average emoluments drawn by him before his retirement
date of 31.07.2025 instead of working out his pension on the basis
of last pay drawn by him in the cadre Assistant Superintendent of
Post Offices for the month of July 2025.
(b)Direct the respondents to issue revised PPO forthwith
sanctioning monthly pension of Rs.69550/- from 01.08.2025 and to
release the pensionary benefits accordingly.
(c) Pass any other order or direction that this Hon'ble Tribunal
may deem it fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the
present case and in the interest of justice and equity.
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
3
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
2. The facts in a nutshell are as follows:
According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the applicant joined
Department of Posts as ‘Postal Assistant’ on 29.07.1991. He went to field service
in Army Postal Service, where he worked from 28.02.1996 till 31.05.2025.
During his service of over 29 years in Army Postal Service (APS), he was
promoted as ‘Inspector of Posts’ on 01.10.2007 and as ‘Assistant Superintendent
of Posts’ on 31.12.2015. He returned to his parent department on 04.06.2025,
and applied for VRS under FR 56 (k), which was accepted with effect from
31.07.2025.
The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the pension of the applicant
has to be fixed under Rule 44 (1) of the CCS (Pension) Rules 2021, according to
which pension has to be calculated at 50% of the emoluments or average
emoluments, whichever is more beneficial to the applicant. However, in
violation of this rule, instead of calculating his pension on the basis of last ten
months average emoluments, the Respondents have fixed it on the basis of last
pay drawn. Hence, he has approached this Hon’ble Tribunal for relief.
3. Applicant
(i) The Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the applicant joined
the Postal Department as Postal Assistant on 29.07.1991 and took voluntary
retirement on 31.07.2025. The applicant was on field duty in Army Postal
Service from 28.02.1996 till 31.05.2025 when he was relieved on attainment of
maximum retainable age of 57 years in APS. While serving in APS, the applicant
applied for VRS on 28.03.2025, which was declined vide postal authority’s
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
4
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
communication bearing No: X-07/15/2023-SPN-II-DOP dated 07.04.2025
stating that VRS is not acceptable while serving in APS.
(ii) The learned counsel for the applicant contends that Government letter
No. 26-21/87-PEN dated 13.12.1988 (Annexure A-5) is still in force and
accordingly he had applied for VRS, while in APS. The learned counsel for the
applicant further submits that the respondents have justified their refusal to
permit VRS while serving in APS on the basis of three letters of the Government
of India bearing No.: 7-4/2021-SPG dated 18.07.2023, No: R-07/2-2025-SPG-
II-DOP dated 10.03.2025 and No: X-07/15/2023-SPN-II-DOP dated 07.04.2025.
(iii) The learned counsel for the applicant further points out that he was
granted quasi substantive promotion to the rank of Lt. Col. in APS with effect
from 12.03.2020 (Annexure A-9) and he was accordingly drawing the pay
attached to the promotional grade of Lt. Col. of Rs. 1,40,500 and Military Service
Pay (MSP) of Rs. 15,500 with effect from January 2025 (total equal to Rs.
1,56,000). Prior to the same, he was drawing a pay of Rs. 1,36,400 plus MSP of
Rs. 15,500 from October to December 2024 (Annexure A-10).
(iv) The learned counsel for the applicant further points out that after his
return from APS and reporting for duty as Assistant Superintendent of Posts in
his parent department, his correct Basic Pay should have been Rs. 76,500 for
June 2025, and Rs. 78,800 after grant of annual increment from July 2025
onwards, as against fixation of Rs. 70,000, which was wrongly done. He further
points out that the PPO issued in July 2025 showed his last pay drawn as Rs.
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
5
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
78,800 only with a monthly pension of Rs. 39,400 (50% of the basic pay) which
is wrong.
(v) According to the learned counsel for the applicant, his pension should
have been worked out on the basis of average pay drawn by applicant during the
last ten months of service completed. He states that the pension fixation done by
the respondents is in complete violation of Rule 44 (1) of the CCS (Pension)
Rules which reads as follows:
"A Government servant, who retires under Rules 33, 34, 35, 36,
37, 38 or Rule 39 after completing a qualifying service of not less
than 10 years shall become eligible for grant of a pension
calculated at 50% of emoluments or average emoluments,
whichever is more beneficial to him subject to a minimum of
Rs.9000/- per month and maximum of Rs.1,25,000/- per month."
(vi) In this regard, he has furnished the following table regarding pay fixation
on the basis of last ten months emoluments which is as follows:
Last 10 Months’ Emoluments
S. Emoluments /
Month / Particulars Remarks
No. Calculation
1 October 2024 Rs. 1,36,400
2 November 2024 Rs. 1,36,400
3 December 2024 Rs. 1,36,400
Note: October 2024 to May
2025 (both months
inclusive) emoluments
drawn in APS as per Ann-
A10
4 January 2025 Rs. 1,40,500
5 February 2025 Rs. 1,40,500
6 March 2025 Rs. 1,40,500
7 April 2025 Rs. 1,40,500
8 May 2025 Rs. 1,40,500
9 June 2025 Rs. 76,500
Emoluments drawn as ASP
in Postal Department
10 July 2025 Rs. 78,800
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
6
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
08 months military
service pay
Rs. 15,500 × 8 =
Rs. 1,24,000
Hence applicant’s
entitlement of monthly
pension would be Rs.
1,39,100 ÷ 2 = Rs. 69,550/-
As per Rule 44(1) of the
CCS (Pension) Rules
10 months average
will work out to
Rs. 13,91,000 ÷ 10
= Rs. 1,39,100
The learned counsel for the applicant has cited the following rules with respect
to the definition of Emoluments and Average Emoluments:
Rule 31 Emoluments: The expression ‘emoluments’ mean basic pay as defined
in Rule 9 (21) (a) (i) of the Fundamental Rules 1922 which a Govt. Servant was
receiving immediately before his retirement or on the date of his death and will
also include non-practicing allowances granted to a Medical Officer in lieu of
private practice.
Rule 32 (1) Average Emoluments shall be determined with reference to the
emoluments drawn by a Govt. servant during the last ten months of his service.
He further points out that he has applied for VRS under Rule 56 (k) of FR and
Rule 43 (1) / 43 (4) (a) of CCS (Pension) Rules 2021 which reads as follows:
FR 56 (k) (1): Any Govt. servant may, by giving notice of not less
than three months in writing to the appropriate authority retire
from service after he has attained the age of 50 years, if he is in
Gr. 'A' or Gr. 'B' service or post (and had entered Govt. service
before attaining the age of 35 years), and in all other cases after
he has attained the age of 55 years.
(Note: Applicant's date of birth is 01.06.1968 and is more than 55
years old as on the date of making the application Ann-A1)
Rule 43 of CCS (Pension) Rules 2021: Retirement on completion
of 20 years qualifying service:
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
7
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
1) At any time after a Govt. servant has completed 20 years
qualifying service, he may by giving notice of not less than 03
months in writing to the Appointing Authority, retire from service
and in the case of such retirement, the Govt. servant shall be
entitled to a retiring pension calculated in accordance with Rule
44.
(4) (a): A Govt. servant referred to in sub-rule (i) may make a
request in writing to the Appointing Authority to accept notice of
Voluntary Retirement of less than 03 months giving reasons
therefor.
He further states that in the light of above rules, the applicant has submitted
retirement notice on 18.07.2025 with effect from 31.07.2025 as per Rule (4)
(a) cited above. In this regard he also cites Rule 34 of the CCS (Pension)
Rules which reads as:
Rule 34 (1) states that "A retiring pension or retiring service
gratuity, as the case may be, shall be granted in accordance with
rule 44, to a Govt. Servant who retires on his own volition, before
attaining the age of superannuation, in accordance with the
provisions of Rule 43 of these rules or Rule 56 of the FR.
He concludes by stating that in view of the above facts and circumstances, he has
asked to direct the respondents to issue revised PPO sanctioning monthly pension
at the rate of Rs. 69,550 from 01.08.2025 by upholding Rule 44 (1) of CCS
(Pension) Rules 2021 regarding fixation of pension on the basis of ten months’
average emoluments.
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
8
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
4. Reply
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent has filed the reply.
(i) The learned counsel for the respondents has essentially reiterated regarding
the service particulars of the applicant in the initial paras. He has further stated
that the applicant was repatriated from APS to Department of Posts on reaching
the age of retirement in APS and then posted as Assistant Superintendent of Posts
vide RO letter No. NKR/STA-2/309/2025 dated 15.05.2025, where he joined on
04.06.2025. He immediately applied for VRS which was approved and he
relinquished charge on VRS on 31.07.2025. His pension papers were processed
strictly as per CCS (Pension) Rules 2021 read with OM No. R-07/2/2025-SPG-
II-DOP dated 10.03.2025 issued by Postal Directorate (Annexure A-7).
Accordingly, his pension was sanctioned at the rate of 50% of the last pay drawn
as on 31.07.2025 (Rs. 78,800 in the level 8 of pay matrix) which comes to Rs.
39,400 with effect from 01.08.2025 vide PPO No. POSTAL/2025/KA/28464
dated 14.11.2025. Subsequently, the applicant has submitted application no.
DOPPW/W/2025/0087159 on the Public Grievance Portal (PG Portal)
requesting to calculate pension on the average of emoluments drawn by him over
the last 10 months of his service. His representation was transferred by
Respondent No. 3 to Respondent No. 2 and is under consideration.
(ii) Defending the action of the respondents regarding his repatriation from
APS to the parent department, the learned counsel for the respondents places
reliance on the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kunal
Nanda vs. UOI & Anr. [(2000) 5 SCC 362] which states as follows:
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
9
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
"the basic principle underlying deputation itself is that the person
concerned can always and at any time be repatriated to his parent
department to serve in his substantive position therein at the instance
of either of the departments and there is no vested right in such a
person to continue for long on deputation or get absorbed in the
department to which he had gone on deputation.”
(iii) Refuting the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that the
pension of the applicant should be calculated on the basis of pay he was drawing
in APS, the learned counsel for the respondents has places reliance on the
following judgements:
(i) Hon’ble Apex Court judgement in Civil Appeal 8139/2019 (UOI & Ors. vs.
Lt Col O M Dutt Sharma (retd) dead through LRS & Ors.
(ii) Lt. Col. Shaji Joseph (Retd.) vs. Union of India & Ors. (In Armed Forces
Tribunal in OA No. 1239 of 2020).
(iii) Major MR Penghal vs. UOI [AIR 1999 SC 543].
(iv) He has also invited my attention to notification dated 20.12.2021 which
states as follows:
“MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND
PENSIONS
(Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare)
NOTIFICATION
th
New Delhi, the 20 December, 2021
“……………………
31………………….
(7) Pay drawn by a Government servant while on deputation to a
State Government or while on foreign service shall not be treated
as emoluments, but the pay which he would have drawn under the
Central Government had he not been on deputation to the State
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
10
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
Government or on foreign service shall alone be treated as
emoluments.
……………………..”
(v) He has also places reliance on CCS (Pension) Rules 2021 read with PM
No R-07/2/2025-SPG-II-DOP dated 10.03.2025 (Annexure-A7) issued by Postal
Directorate. As per Para 4(iv) of the above OM " APS officers granted quasi-
substantive ranks in the Army will hold such ranks for so long as they are serving
in APS. Officers will have no claim to any benefits by virtue of holding the same
on reversion to the parent cadre".
(vi) The learned counsel for the respondents states that the substantive post
of the applicant at the time of VR was ASP and accordingly the pension of the
applicant has been calculated at 50% of emoluments in the substantive cadre
(Rs.78800/- in the level 8 of the Pay Matrix) in accordance with Rule 44(1) of
CCS (Pension) Rules 2021 as it was more beneficial to the applicant than the
50% of average emoluments calculated by the pay in the substantive cadre for
last 10 months from 01.10.2024 to 31.07.2025 [(765009+788001)/10=76730].
5. Rejoinder
In response to the reply filed by the learned counsel for the respondents, the
learned counsel for the applicant has filed a rejoinder. In his rejoinder he has
essentially reiterated the facts which are already mentioned in the OA. However,
the important points mentioned in the rejoinder are summarized as below:
(i) While the relief claimed by the applicant is strictly as per Rule 44 (1) of
CCS (Pension) Rules 2021 which entitles him pension of Rs. 69,550 per month
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
11
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
with effect from 01.08.2025, the learned counsel for the respondents has not
refuted the same. He has made a broad generalized statement that the pension
was fixed in terms of CCS (Pension) Rules 2021 without indicating the relevant
clause.
(ii) The crux of the matter is regarding the applicability of Rule 44(1) of CCS
(Pension) Rules 2021 which clearly indicates that average of emoluments of last
10 months preceding retirement should be factored for calculation of pension.
(iii) The learned counsel for the respondents has not refuted the applicability
of Circular No. 26-21/87-PEN dated 13.12.1988 (Annexure A-5) which
therefore continues to be applicable to all concerned including the applicant.
(iv) The learned counsel for the applicant has also stated that the pension on the
basis of average emoluments of last 10 months has been calculated and is being
given in several other similarly situated cases. In this regard, he has cited the
example in the case of Sri. R. Sanjay, letter dated 04.12.2025 has been issued by
Postal Authority of West Bengal Circle and also reply from APS Accounts
Section Nagpur vide letter dated 20.01.2026 cited as Annexures RJ-1 and RJ-2.
6. Additional Reply
In response to the rejoinder filed by learned counsel for the applicant, the learned
counsel for the respondents has also filed additional reply in which he has
essentially reiterated the arguments which had already been covered in the reply.
He has once again drawn my attention to Para 4 (iv) of the OM No. R-07/2/2025-
SPG-II-DOP dated 10.03.2025 issued by Postal Directorate.
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
12
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
(i) Defending the action of the respondents regarding calculation of the
pension of the applicant at 50% of last pay drawn in substantive post on the date
of his relinquishing charge, he has once again reiterated that the same was carried
out in accordance with CCS (Pension) Rules 2021.
(ii) He also points out that Rule 31 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 speaks
about the emoluments that the Government Servant was receiving immediately
before his retirement only. Further, Rule 31 (6) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021
refers to pay drawn by a Government servant while on deputation to an ex-cadre
post in the same or some other Department of the Govt. or to the Armed Forces
of India as emoluments but does not clarify whether pay drawn while on
deputation to Army Postal Service can be considered for calculation of average
emoluments and pension.
(iii) In the absence of any specific mention regarding calculation of pension
on the basis of pay drawn while on deputation to Army Postal Service for
calculation of average emoluments, there is no question of deviating from the
extant rules. He has specifically submitted written notes of arguments on
12.10.2026 wherein he has cited Rule 31 (7) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021
which reads as follows:
“Pay drawn by a Government Servant while on deputation to a State
Government or while on Foreign Service shall not be treated as emoluments, but
the pay which he would have drawn in the parent department had he not been on
deputation to State Government or on Foreign Service shall alone be treated as
emoluments.”
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
13
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
He has further stated that an employee of the Department of Posts for serving in
APS on deputation basis does not acquire status of ex-servicemen or independent
entitlement to pensionary benefits as applicable to Army/APS. Deputation is just
a temporary transfer and the parent department continues to retain lien and
administrative control over the employee who went on deputation and eventually
returns to the parent unit. Hence, he is not eligible for the benefits related to the
emoluments that he was drawing on deputation.
7. Conclusion:
(1) I have heard at length the arguments of both the counsels and have also
gone through all the documents and records which were brought on record by
the respective counsels.
At this stage, it would be useful to go through the relevant documents/records
and the judgments of the Superior Courts, which have been submitted by the
rival counsel for better appreciation of the entire issue and for arriving at correct
conclusion. They are reproduced as follows:
(2) M/o Defence instructions dated 24.08.2006 (Annexure A-3)
“No. 32006/AVSC/AG/PS-2(a)
Bharat Sarkar/Government of India
Raksha Mantralaya/Ministry of Defence
New Delhi – 110011
th
24 August 2006
To,
The Chief of Army Staff
New Delhi
Sub: RESTRUCTURING OF OFFICERS' CADRE IN ARMY
POSTAL SERVICE
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
14
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
Sir,
……….
2. Promotion. Officers granted Temporary Commission in the APS
will be eligible for quasi-substantive promotion to higher ranks
subject to completion of the under mentioned years of qualifying
service (commissioned or equivalent service) w.e.f. 16 Dec 2004:-
Rank Qualifying Service for Quasi-Substantive
Promotion in APS
Capt 2 years
Major 6 years
Lt Col 13 years
Col (TS) 26 years
3. Officers granted Temporary Commission in any rank before
completion of the qualifying service prescribed at Para 2 above will
hold that rank in acting capacity till they are granted quasi-
substantive promotion to that rank.
…………………
6. APS officers granted quasi-substantive ranks in the Army will hold
such ranks for so long as they are serving in APS. Officers will have
no claim to any benefits by virtue of holding the same, on reversion
to parent cadre. The quasi-substantive ranks granted under these
orders will be treated for purposes of pay and allowances in the same
manner as substantive ranks granted to permanent commissioned
officers. In the absence of a higher paid acting rank, the quasi-
substantive rank will be taken into account for all pensionary awards,
if any.
…………………………..”
(3) D/o Posts instructions dated 13.12.1988 (Annexure A-5)
“Ministry of Communications
Department of Posts
Dak Tar Bhavan
New Delhi – 110001
No. 26-21/87 – PEN. 13.12.1988
To,
The All Heads of Circles,
Sub:-Treating of Rank Pay as pay for purpose of calculation of
pension in respect of Postal Officers on deputation to APS.
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
15
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
Sir,
……………
2. It has now been decided in consultation with Deptt. of Pension and
pensioners Welfare that the Rank pay drawn by Postal Officers as
part of Military pay while on deputation to APS during the last ten
months preceeding their date of retirement shall be reckoned as pay
for purpose of computing their Civil Pension.
These orders will take effect from 01.01.1986.
………………”
(4) OM dated 18.07.2023 (Annexure A-6)
“No.7-4/2021-SPG
Government of India
Ministry of Communications
Department of Posts
(Personnel Division)
Dak Bhavan Sansad Marg
New Delhi-110001
Dated: 18.07.2023
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Amendment to AI 29/85 and Gol letter dated 19.03.1985
regarding Non-Regular personnel of Army Postal Service (APS).
…………………
ii. Retirement while working in APS shall not be allowed. Officials
(upto the rank of Lt Col) will be required to be repatriated to DoP
atleast 1 year before the age of retirement in civil side/parent
department or age of compulsory retirement in Army whichever is
earlier.
iii. Maximum service period in APS (upto the rank of Lt Col) for DoP
officials as 20 years during the entire service in Government for
Commissioned officers only. not for JCOs/ORs.
……………..”
(5) OM dated 10.03.2025 (Annexure A-7)
“No. R-07/2/2025-SPG-II-DOP
Government of India
Ministry of Communications
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
16
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
Department of Posts
(SPG-II Section)
th
New Delhi, the 10 March, 2025
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Court cases in APS matters – Previous settled
Judgement/Orders in favour of Department of Posts reg.
…………………
iii) As per categorical instruction No.6 of terms and conditions laid
down in Annexure 'A' to Al 29/85 dated 01.09.1985 (copy enclosed),
"For service pension, officers will be governed by civil rules."
Therefore, provision of CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 shall be
applicable in case of the temporary commissioned APS
officials/officers.
(iv) Ministry of Defence vide letter No.32006/AVSC/AG/PS-2(a)
dated 24.08.2006 (copy attached) states as follows:
"APS officers granted quasi-substantive ranks in the Army will hold
such ranks for so long as they are serving in APS. Officers will have
no claim to any benefits by virtue of holding the same on reversion
to the parent cadre."
(v) The above applicants hold lien against civil posts in this
Department, there service conditions are governed by the civil rules.
The basic employment of the applicant and all conditions of service
i.e. Pension, vacancy, Disciplinary rules etc. attached to his
employment in this Department have continued to operate as per
terms and conditions for his initial appointment.
5……………………
(iv) The Hon'ble Apex Court in 'Major M.R. Penghal v. Uol'
((1998)5SCC454) {in Civil Appeal Nos.556/1998 & 557/1998)
(copy enclosed) already decided the above jurisdiction and held as
under:
“…….Since the appellant was not a member of the Armed Forces
and continued to work as a civilian on deputation to the Army
Postal Service, his case was covered under Section 14(1)(a) of the
Administrative Tribunals Act."
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
17
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
(v) The above settled law was again reiterated by the Hon'ble Apex
Court vide judgement dated 05.11.2019 in CA No.8139/2019 {Uol
&Ors. v. Lt. Col. OM Dutt Sharma (Retd.) dead through LRS &
Ors.) (copy enclosed). In the said judgement, it is also held that:
i. ".... The respondents have discharged their duties as per Army
Instructions issued from time to time. If they have drawn higher
salaries while working in the APS than other counterparts in the
Department of Posts that will not make them at par with the
members of the Armed Forces. Their birth mark is with the
Department of Posts which mark was never removed, when they
were serving as members of APS. The Instructions provided for an
option on promotion on every rank in the Army to draw either
military pay and allowances or civil pay plus deputation allowances
meaning thereby that they continue to hold their lien on the civil
posts in the Department of Posts. Since they hold a lien in the
Department of Posts they could be recalled by the Department of
Posts as well as they could seek reversion to their parent
Department."
………………….
(v) Recently, the Hon'ble AFT, RB, Kochi vide order dated
01.07.2024 in OA No.13/2024 { Lt. Col. V C Paulose V/s Uol &
Ors.) (copy enclosed) held that:
"...Indisputably, Pension Sanctioning Authority under the
Department of Posts will not come under the jurisdiction of
this Tribunal. Therefore, we find that this Bench of the
Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain this Originai
Application."
(vi) The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "Kunal Nanda vs. Uol
& Anr." reported in (2000) 5 SCC 362 (copy enclosed) has already
held that "The basic principle underlying deputation itself is that
the person concerned can always and at any time be repatriated to
his parent department to serve in his substantive position therein at
the instance of either of the departments and there is no vested right
in such a person to continue for long on deputation or get absorbed
in the department to which he had gone on deputation."
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
18
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
(vii) Some temporary commissioned officials/officers of APS also
raised the issue of selection "exclusively for APS appointed in the
cadre of Postal Assistant/Sorting Assistant". In a precedent case of
similarly situated persons, Hon'ble AFT, Chandigarh Bench vide
order dated 23.11.2015 in OA No.4445/2013 & OA No.4449/2013
(copy attached) already held that the parent civil department of the
such applicant is Department of Posts.
………………”
(6) Order dated 07.04.2025 (Annexure A-8)
“No. X-07/15/2023-SPN-II-DOP
Government of India
Ministry of Communications
Department of Posts
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg
New Delhi-110 001
Dated: 07-04-2025
To,
The Addi DG APS,
C/o 56 APO.
Subject: Notice from Shri Nagaraja Devagundi, holding temporary
commission as TC-31586H Lt. Col in APS, seeking Voluntary
Retirement from service-reg
…………………..
4(1) There is no provision of voluntary retirement from APS in Army
Instructions No. 29/85.
4(ii) As per this Department letters No. X-17/1/2018-SPB-Il dated
10.01.2019 & dated 24.01.2019 read with CCS (Pension) Rules,
2021, "all appointing authorities not to accept request for voluntary
retirement directly from Army Postal Service (APS) without an
official being repatriated to civil side and that such request for
voluntary retirement would be considered only after repatriation of
the official to the parent unit in civil side."
b. It is reiterated that there is no provision of voluntary retirement in
Al 29/85 including para 9(3)(d) of Al 29/85.
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
19
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
2. APS Directorate is therefore requested to take appropriate action
accordingly.”
(7) Part-II Order dated 13.03.2020 (Annexure A-9)
“…………….
Personal No : TC-31586H
Name of Officer : Nagaraj D
……………..
Ser
(01)
Casualty
Code
(02)
Name of
Casualty
(03)
From date
Dd/mm/yy
(04)
To date
Dd/mm/yy
(05)
Data
1
(06)
Date
2
(07)
Data
3
(08)
Data
4
(09)
001 SUBPROM Granted Quasi-
Substantive
Promotion to
the Rank of Lt.
Col wef 12 Mar
2020
12032020 -- -- -- -- --
Authority: GOI, MoD letter No. 32006/AVSC/AG/DS-2 (a) dt. 24
Aug 2006.
………………….”
(8) Director of Accounts Nagpur letter dt. 24.06.2025 (Annexure A-10)
“DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, INDIA
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF ACCOUNTS (POSTAL)
BASE CIRCLE, NAGPUR-440001
No. APS-I/TC-31586H/Service Book/ Date/06/2025
……………………….
TC 31586H LT COL NAGARAJ DEVAGUNDI
Details of Pay and Allowances from March 2025 (paid in April) to
31 May 2025 (A/N)
The officer is drawing salary through : SBI Bank A/c No.
20244291763
IFSC Code: SBIN0005670
PAN No. AISPD0447L
INCOME STATEMENT : 2025-2026 / PAY – RECOVERY
PARTICULARS
Emoluments
Particulars Mar 2025 Apr 2025 May 2025 Total
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
20
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
PAY 140500.00 140500.00 140500.00 421500.00
DA 82680.00 85800.00 85800.00 254280.00
MSP 15500.00 15500.00 15500.00 46500.00
TPTA 11016.00 11160.00
DA, TPTA
ARRS
9792.00 9792.00
TOTAL 249696.00 262752.00 252960.00 765408.00
……………………”
(9) From the above documents brought on record, the following facts emerge:
(i) The applicant joined Department of Posts in 1991, went on deputation to
Army Postal Service in 1996 and worked there for 29 years.
(ii) During his service of 29 years in APS, he was promoted as ‘Inspector of
Posts’ in 2007 and as ‘Assistant Superintendent of Posts’ in 2015.
(iii) After serving for 29 years in APS, he was relieved from there on attaining
maximum retainable age of 57 years.
Thus, it is clear that in his total government service of approximately 34 years,
he served in APS for 29 years which is almost 85% of his total service.
(iv) It is further seen that there is nothing brought on record that the
communication vide No. 26-21/87 – PEN dated 13.12.1988 (Annexure A-5) has
been withdrawn or cancelled or overruled by any further OM/communication of
Department of Posts or DoPT. The learned counsel for the respondents have also
neither contested nor disputed regarding the continued applicability of this
communication. The relevant portions of this letter is reproduced for
convenience:
“……………
2. It has now been decided in consultation with Deptt. of Pension and
pensioners Welfare that the Rank pay drawn by Postal Officers as
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
21
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
part of Military pay while on deputation to APS during the last ten
months preceeding their date of retirement shall be reckoned as pay
for purpose of computing their Civil Pension.
These orders will take effect from 01.01.1986.
………………”
(v) Regarding fixation of pension etc., the learned counsel for the respondents
has invited my attention to OMs dated 18.07.2023, 10.03.2025, and 07.04.2025
which are cited as Annexure A-6, A-7 and A-8. The essence of these OMs is as
follows:
(i) All Government employees who were on deputation to APS will be governed
by Civil Rules for service pension.
(ii) Their pension, vacancy, emoluments etc will be as per the terms and
conditions of their initial appointment against civil post in his department.
(iii) As per the Judgement in “ Major MR Penghal vs. UOI” cited in OM dated
10.03.2025, they can be recalled by the Department of Posts at any point of time
and their cases will be governed under Section 14 (1) (a) of the Central
Administrative Tribunals Act . There is no vested right in such employees to
continue for long on deputation or get absorbed in the department where they
have gone for deputation.
(iv) The applicant was denied VRS from APS in consonance with above cited
three OMs. It is also seen that the applicant was repatriated in consonance with
the above OMs. However, the learned counsel for the applicant has neither
challenged rejection of the applicant’s representation for VRS from APS nor his
repatriation from parent department.
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
22
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
(v) The learned counsel for the applicant has simply requested for calculation of
the pension of the applicant on the basis of Rule 44 (1) of the CCS (Pension)
Rules which reads as follows:
"A Government servant, who retires under Rules 33, 34, 35, 36,
37, 38 or Rule 39 after completing a qualifying service of not less
than 10 years shall become eligible for grant of a pension
calculated at 50% of emoluments or average emoluments,
whichever is more beneficial to him subject to a minimum of
Rs.9000/- per month and maximum of Rs.1,25,000/- per month."
(vi) Rule 31 Emoluments: The expression ‘emoluments’ mean basic pay as
defined in Rule 9 (21) (a) (i) of the Fundamental Rules 1922 which a Govt.
Servant was receiving immediately before his retirement or on the date of his
death and will also include non-practicing allowances granted to a Medical
Officer in lieu of private practice.
Rule 32 (1) Average Emoluments shall be determined with reference to the
emoluments drawn by a Govt. servant during the last ten months of his service.
(vii) Furthermore, the average emoluments has been defined as per Annexure A-
5 to be the average of the monthly emoluments drawn by the applicant over the
last 10 months before his superannuation/VRS.
(viii) It is further seen that the learned counsel for the respondents has not at all
rejected or refuted the applicability of Rule 31, 32 (1) and Rule 44 (1) of the CCS
(Pension) Rules.
(10) It is also seen that examples of similarly situated persons of Department of
Posts which were given these benefits (Annexure RJ-1 and RJ-2) cited by the
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
23
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
learned counsel for the applicant have not been refuted or contended by the
learned counsel for the respondents.
(11) It will be useful at this stage to determine the applicant’s applicability or
otherwise of the judgements cited by the learned counsel for the respondents to
the facts and circumstances of this case. They are delineated as follows:
(i) In UOI & Ors. vs. Lt. Col. O M Dutt Sharma (retd.) dead through LRS
& Ors. in Civil Appeal 8139/2019, the case essentially relates to sanction of one
rank, one pension to the employees on deputation to APS/units of Armed Forces.
In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as follows:
(i)".. The respondents have discharged their duties as per Army
Instructions issued from time to time. If they have drawn higher
salaries while working in the APS than other counterparts in the
Department of Posts that will not make them at par with the members
of the Armed Forces. Their birth mark is with the Department of Posts
which mark was never removed, when they were serving as members
of APS……
(iii) "the conditions show that the members of the APS continues to
hold lien in the Department of Posts though they were conferred
ranks in the Army and were also entitled to certain benefits as the
members of the Armed Forces during the period of their Temporary
Commission does not make them a pensioner of the Armed Forces...".
The facts and circumstances of this judgement are totally different from the case
of the applicant. In the said judgement, the applicant had requested for parity and
benefits for which Members of the Armed Forces were solely eligible and were
not applicable to the applicants who were on deputation. In the present OA, the
applicant has not asked for any benefit as applicable to APS or any Armed
Forces.
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
24
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
(ii) Lt. Col. Shaji Joseph (Retd.) vs. Union of India & Ors. (In Armed Forces
Tribunal in OA No. 1239 of 2020), the Court held as follows:
“………………..
27. The short question for consideration is as to whether the
borrowing authority of the applicant i.e. Respondents Nos. 4,5 and 8,
are duty bound to release the retirement benefits to him, as prayed by
the applicant in the OA instead of Respondent No. 6 as submitted by
the respondents in their counter affidavit.
…………………
32. Rule 67 of the CCS Pension Rules, 1972 reads as under:
“67. Government Servant on deputation
(1) In the case of the Government servant who retires while on
deputation to another Central Govt. Department, action to authorize
pension and gratuity in accordance with the provision of this Chapter
shall be taken by the Head of Office of the borrowing Department.”
…………….
36. The net result of the aforesaid discussion is that it is the
Respondent No. 6, who is the Competent Authority to issue
pensionary benefits to the applicant, therefore, the applicant is not
entitled to the declaration as stated in Para 8(i) to (iv) of the OA.
Since he was only on deputation to APS, he is also not entitled either
for ‘Ex-serviceman’ status or for ‘Ex-servicemen Contributory
Health Scheme (ECHS)’, as prayed for. So far as his claim for interest
is concerned, he is not entitled for the same as it was due to his own
fault that he did not get the pensionary benefits from Respondent No.
6 and he cannot be allowed to take advantage of the same.
………………………”
From the above, it is very clear that the AFT had rejected the OA on the grounds
that the applicant was only on deputation and had asked for benefits applicable
for ex-serviceman status or Ex-Serviceman Contributory Health Scheme. It is
again seen that in this present OA, the applicant has not asked for any benefits
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
25
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
which are applicable to APS employees or ex-serviceman employees and
therefore, this judgement is not applicable to him.
(iii) Major MR Penghal vs. UOI [AIR 1999 SC 543], the Hon’ble Supreme
Court held as follows:
“………………………..
9………………We, therefore, uphold the judgment and order of the
High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant. Since
the appellant while holding civil post was working in the Army Postal
Service on deputation, the Central Administrative Tribunal had
jurisdiction to entertain and decide the original application filed by
the appellant. We accordingly set aside the order dated 31-1-1997
passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New
Delhi, and remand the case to it to decide expeditiously Original
Application No. 1647 of 1996 of the appellant, on
merits……………..”
(12) From the above analysis it is very clear that the judgements in the above
three cases are not at all applicable to the case of the applicant. It is further seen
that the learned counsel for the respondents during the course of the arguments
in the court and also in his reply has stated that the representation of the applicant
regarding calculation of his pension on the basis of average emoluments is
presently under consideration of the respondents.
(13) From the above facts and circumstances, it is very clear that the applicant
has not asked for any benefits which are applicable for APS employees or
Members of Armed Forces, which were the subject matter of above cited
judgements. He has merely asked for calculation of pension on the basis of
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI
26
OA No.170/00565/2025/CAT/BANGALORE
average emoluments of the last 10 months before his VRS which is strictly in
consonance with the extant rules, cited above.
(14) Thus, the OA has considerable merit. Hence, the OA is allowed. It is hereby
ordered:
(i) To consider the fixation of the applicant in terms of Rules 31, 32 read with
Rule 44 (1) of CCS (Pension) Rules 2021, on the basis of average emoluments
of last ten months drawn by him before his retirement on 31.07.2025.
(ii) To issue revised PPO after carrying out the calculation as per the extant rules
cited above and to release pension benefits accordingly.
(iii) All MAs, if any, stand disposed of.
(iv) No costs.
Sd/-
(SANTOSH MEHRA)
MEMBER (A)
kr
KOMAL RANI
KOMAL CAT Bangalore
2026.10.23
17:38:49+05'30'
RANI