SUGANYA K vs M/o Communications

1 OA 1179/2019
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH

OA/310/001179/2019

th
Dated, the 8 day of October, Two Thousand Twenty Six

CORAM :

HON’BLE MR.M.SWAMINATHAN, MEMBER (J)
&
HON’BLE MR.M.L.SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (A)

K.Suganya,
No.27, Aani Street,
Ramanathan Nagar,
Tiruvarur 610 001. … Applicant

By Advocate .. M/s. T.Ashok Raj

Vs.

1.Union of India,
Rep., by the Secretary,
Ministry of Communications,
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi 110 001.

2.The Assistant Director General (SPN),
Ministry of Communications,
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi 110 001.

3.The Chief Postmaster General,
Tamil Nadu Circle, Anna Salai,
Chennai 600 002.

4.The Assistant Director (Rectt.)
O/o. the Chief Postmaster General,
Tamilnadu Circle, Anna Salai,
Chennai 600 002.
5.Superintendent of Post Offices,
Nagapattinam Division,
Nagapattinam 611 001. … Respondents


By Advocate .. Mr.M.Kishore Kumar SPC

2 OA 1179/2019
ORDER

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr.M.L.SRIVASTAVA, Member(A))

The applicant has filed the present OA under Section 19 of the
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:
nd
“(i)To call for the records of the 2 respondent pertaining to his order
which is made in F.No.04-08/2019-SPN/I dated 08.07.2019 and set
aside the same, consequent to
(ii) Direct the respondents to permit the applicant to appear LDCE for
promotion/appointment for the post of PA/SA which is scheduled to
be held on 15.09.2019 and thereby further direct to promote/appoint
the applicant as PA/SA subject to come out successful in the said
examination by the applicant; and
(iii) To pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may
deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. The applicant was engaged as GDS (BPM) (Gramin Dak Sevak Branch
Post Master) at Nadapur BO a/w Kangalanchery SO w.e.f 20.01.2012, vide
th
order dated 29.05.2015 by the 5 respondent. She was further appointed as
Postwoman through competitive examination and joined service as Post
Woman after completion of successful training on 22.10.2018 at Tiruvarur HO.
3. As contended by the learned counsel for the applicant, she was eligible
for promotion/appointment for the post of Postal Assistant/Sorting Assistant
(PA/SA) through competitive examination for the vacancies of the year 2017-
2018 & 2018. The authorities did not conduct competitive examination to fill
up the unfilled departmental quota vacancies earmarked for the years 2015-
2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2018. The second respondent, vide his letter
dated 08.07.2019 (Annexure A-4) stated that, “The matter has been
examined. The eligibility criteria are decided with reference to crucial date,
therefore, if someone was GDS on the crucial date, he would have been eligible
had the examination was conducted in time. It has, therefore, been decided

3 OA 1179/2019
by the competent authority that such candidates who were GDS as on crucial
date of eligibility, i.e., 01.04.2015, 01.04.2016, 01.04.2017 and 01.04.2018
be permitted to write the examination for PA/SA to be held on 14.07.2019.”
However, on the same day, i.e., on 08.07.2019, the said notification was
withdrawn, vide letter in F.No.04-08/2019-SPN-I (Annexure A-5).
4. The applicant challenged the letter directing withdrawal of the
instructions for permission to appear in the departmental examination limited
to GDS for promotion to the post of PA/SA. The matter was examined by this
Tribunal on the question of interim relief. The applicant sought to participate
in the LDCE for the post of PA/SA which was scheduled on 15.09.2019. It was
submitted that the applicant had worked as GDS for more than five years and
hence she was eligible for taking part in the competitive examination. As
submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant, the LDCE for PA/SA was
not conducted to fill up the unfilled departmental quota vacancies earmarked
for the years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2018. All the GDS
employees who worked during the said period missed the opportunities to
appear in the LDCE for getting promoted as PA/SA. Thus as submitted by the
learned counsel for the applicant that the LDCE that took place on 15.09.2019
was also for filling up the departmental quota vacancies earmarked for the
years, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 & 2018, for which the crucial date
of eligibility is 01.04.2015, 01.04.2016, 01.04.2017 & 01.04.2018 respectively
and for which prior LDCE should have been conducted, but were not conducted
and all those GDS employees who worked during the said period should have
been allowed to appear in the LDCE and the applicant in the instant OA who
was a GDS on the four crucial dates for those years is also covered by this.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Tribunal

4 OA 1179/2019
observed that the balance of convenience was in favour of the applicant and
the respondents were directed to permit the applicant to write the LDCE for
the post of PA/SA on 15.09.2019 and to keep the results of the applicant in a
sealed cover until further orders.
6. As submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents, the LDCE was
scheduled on 15.09.2019 and the applicant was not allowed to appear in the
same as she was not a GDS on the date of the notification of the examination,
i.e., on 04.06.2019.
7. The fulcrum of the case lies on the fact that whether the applicant was
a GDS on the crucial date of eligibility for the respective vacancy years. The
LDCE for PA/SA was not conducted to fill up the unfilled departmental quota
vacancies earmarked for the years 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 &
2018. All the GDS employees who worked during the said period missed the
opportunities to appear in the LDCE for getting promoted as PA/SA. The LDCE
that took place on 15.09.2019 was also for filling up the departmental quota
vacancies earmarked for the years, 2015-2016, 2016-2017, 2017-2018 &
2018, for which the crucial date of eligibility is 01.04.2015, 01.04.2016,
01.04.2017 & 01.04.2018 respectively and for which prior LDCE should have
been conducted, but were not conducted and all those GDS employees,
including the applicant who worked during the said period and who had also
completed five years as GDS should have been allowed to appear in the LDCE
and the applicant in the instant OA who was a GDS on the crucial date for
2017-2018 and 2018 is also covered by this. Accordingly, this Tribunal allowed
her to appear in the said examination scheduled on 15.09.2019.

5 OA 1179/2019

8. Similar issue has already been dealt with by the Bangalore Bench of this
Tribunal in OA 967/2019, vide order dated 08.09.2022, the relevant portion of
which is extracted hereunder:
22. The contention of the respondents that allowing the applicant to appear in the
LDCE would affect the promotion prospects of the existing GDS staff is arbitrary and
cannot be accepted. This is competitive examination and there is no justification for
the department to deny an opportunity to the applicant to compete on merits since
he was otherwise eligible to compete for the vacancies on the crucial dates as
prescribed by the respondents. This denial would also result in a situation where the
existing GDS employees who would be junior to the applicants would be getting an
opportunity to be appointed as a PA/SA while denying a similar opportunity to the
applicants.
23. As is evident from the documents submitted by the applicant, in the subsequent
examinations held on 20.12.2020,10.1.2021 and 11.10.2020 for selection to the post
of PA/SA, PM/MG and MTS respectively, the respondents had ordered to release the
results of those candidates which were kept in sealed cover and who were otherwise
eligible to the said examination and the candidates were considered for selection to
the cadre of PM/MG in the case of candidates who had already been selected and
joined as MTS earlier or those who had joined as Postman/Mail Guard based on the
results of the LDCE for the recruitment to the cadre of PM/MG held on 10.1.2021.
Such candidates were allowed to make a written request for reversion from MTS or
PM/MG cadre to GDS cadre with the condition that after reversion, such GDS shall
forfeit all rights that would have accrued had he/she continued in the aforesaid post
in the Regular Establishment. Accordingly, an undertaking from the GDS candidate
was also obtained that he/she will not claim any rights to the post of MTS or
Postman/Mail Guard in future based on the above exam results. A separate
undertaking was also directed to be taken from them that they will forgo the service
rendered in MTS or PM/MG cadre and will not claim any benefits for the services
rendered in MTS or PM/MG cadre i.e. uniform Allowance, Increment, Bonus, TA/TP
etc. It was also specified that they will also not claim MACP from the date of joining

in the lower cadre in future.
24. In the present case, the applicant vide interim orders issued by this Tribunal had
been permitted provisionally to appear in the LDCE examination. As per the result
furnished by the respondents, he stands already qualified in the examination held in
the year 2019 for selection to the post of PA/SA.
25. Accordingly, it would be appropriate if the applicant is also given a similar
dispensation as given to other candidates in the year 2020. He shall be allowed to
make a written representation and exercise an option to revert to the post of GDS in
the year 2017 for consequent appointment as PA/SA in the year 2019, based upon
his qualifying the LDCE for the vacancy of the relevant year for which he is eligible to
be considered. An undertaking from him having to forgo the service rendered as a
Postman and not claiming any benefits for the services rendered in Postman cadre
and not claiming any MACP benefit from the date of joining as Postman shall also be
taken from him.
26. Keeping the above points in view, the OA is allowed. The respondents are
directed to permit the applicant to exercise an option, if he so desires, for reversion
to GDS cadre in 2017 and subsequent appointment in the PA/SA cadre on the basis

6 OA 1179/2019
of his performance in the LDCE examination conducted in the year 2019 for the
vacancies of the years 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18.

9. Further, this Bench of the Tribunal in OA 1271/2024, vide order dated
23.03.2026 has also dealt with similar issue and the relevant portion of the
said order is extracted as under:
“35. Under such circumstances, the respondents were clearly wrong in holding that
as on the date of scrutiny of application, applicants were not GDS and they were not
eligible to appear in Competitive Examination limited to GDS only. Pursuant to the
direction given by this Tribunal permitting the applicants to appear in the
examination, the applicants had written the examination and had come out
successful. Therefore, applicants were eligible for appointment/ posting as Postman
/ Mail Guard pursuant to the notification dated 15/07/2022. Merely because
applicants had become MTS during the scrutiny of the application, they could not
have been denied their right to participate in the examination nor their right of
appointment to a higher post when they had come out successful in the
examination.
36. In fact, there was clear cut direction issued by the 3rd respondent vide letter
dated 15.09.2023 that cases of GDSs who have appeared in the Competitive
Examination from GDS to Postman /Mail Guard and subsequently joined as MTS and
working in various divisions /Units, may be processed in accordance with the
instructions issued by DoPT vide OM dated 24/11/2022 on Technical Resignation
when such officials want to accept the offer for selection as Postman /Mail Guard.
Therefore, there was no justification for such unreasonable stand taken by the
respondents in the impugned order dated 05.07.2024 rejecting the representation
of the applicants and thereby denying them the post of Postman and Mail Guard
which was rightfully due to them.
37. In view of the foregoing discussions, OA is allowed. The impugned orders issued
by the Respondent dated 05.07.2024 rejecting the individual representations given
by the applicants are hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to
appoint/ applicants to the posts of Postman/Mail Guard for the recruitment year
2022, on the basis of their merit rank in the competitive examination held on
04.09.2022 pursuant to the Notification dated 15/07/2022, from the date when their
immediate juniors in the merit rank had been appointed to the post of Postman /
Mail Guard and assign them seniority accordingly. The applicants will be entitled to
all consequential benefits, including seniority, fixation of pay, etc. The respondents
shall complete the whole exercise as so directed within a period of four months from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Order. There shall be no order as to
costs.“


10. Thus, it is found that the balance of convenience lies in the favour of the
applicant and as the applicant had already appeared in the said examination
held on 15.09.2019, the concerned respondent authorities are hereby directed

7 OA 1179/2019
to open the sealed cover and appoint the applicant as PA/SA, from the date
the other successful candidates in the said LDCE were appointed, with all
consequential benefits, provided she comes out successful in the competitive
examination and fulfils all other required conditions. The said exercise shall be
completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this order.
11. With the above directions, the OA is allowed. No order as to costs.



(M.L.SRIVASTAVA) (M.SWAMINATHAN)
MEMBER(A) MEMBER (J)

MT 08.10.2026

Digitally signed by THANGAM
M
Date: 2026.11.02 12:52:49
+05'30'
THANGAM M