A VENNILA vs POSTS

1 of 11
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH
O.A. No. 310/00537 of 2022
&
M.A. No.310/00346/2025 in O.A No.310/00537/2022
.
th
DATED THURSDAY, THE 17 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
CORAM :
HON'BLE MS. VEENA KOTHAVALE, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE MR. SISIR KUMAR RATHO, MEMBER(A)
A. Vennila (age 60),
W/o. M.R.Muniappan,
Maniambadi BO,
Kadathur SO,
Dharmapuri District,
PIN-635 303.
(GDS BPM, Maniambadi BO)
……..Applicant
(Advocate: M/s.R. Malaichamy)
Versus
Union of India,
Rep. by the Superintendent of Post Offices,
Dharmapuri Division,
Dharmapuri - 636 701.
(Advocate: Mr. S. Nagarajan)
CAV ON : 20.08.2026

2 of 11
O R D E R
(Hon'ble Ms. Veena Kothavale, Member(J)

Applicant has filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the
Administrative Tribunals’ Act 1985 seeking the following relief:-
“1. To call for the records of the respondent pertaining to his order
which is made in NO. ASP/OA/1418/2018 dated 17.08.2019 and set
aside the same, consequent to;
2. direct the respondent to restore the pay to the applicant in the
TRCA slab as Rs.3660-70-5760/- with pay protection till her pay has
been fixed as per the Triennial Review conducted for the year 2017
and thereafter revise and re-fix the pay of the applicant in the TRCA
slab Rs.3200-60-5000 and pay the arrears of the same to her, further
to,
3. direct the respondent to pay the increment due to the applicant
and the arrears of the same to her with interest, also to
4. direct the respondent to refund the amount of recovery if any to
her with interest, and
5. To pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal
may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Post Master (
2. The applicant is working as GDS BPM)
and drawing Time Related Continuity Allowances (TRCA) of Rs.4920 (Basic TRCA)
+6150 (applicable DA)+100(Official Maintenance Allowance) + 25 (Fixed Stationery

3 of 11
Charge)= Rs.11,195/- w.e.f. 01.10.2015 in the scale of Rs.4575-85-7125/-. Though
TRCA has to be fixed by conducting Triennial Review of the work-load of the BPM
once in three years as per Rules, no such review was conducted in the case of
applicant. However, the respondent has reduced the pay of applicant to Rs.2745-50-
4245/- from 2015, without issuing any notice, assigning any reason, and without
passing any order in writing and consequently, the applicant was drawing monthly
salary of Rs. 4295+5901+100+25=Rs.10,321/-. Therefore, applicant gave a
representation dated 10.04.2018 making a request to restore her original pay, but
there was no response. The applicant was further denied the increment that was due
to her and the respondent also ordered recovery of Rs.25,894/- from her pay alleging
excess payment of TRCA. Hence, applicant gave another representation dated
17.04.2018 requesting to grant increment and to refund the recovered amount stating
that she had not made any fraudulent representation to fix her pay, the pay authority
itself had fixed her pay which was correctly done, and therefore, the allegation that
she was paid excess TRCA of Rs.25,894/- is incorrect and the recovery is in total
violation of the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in White Washer case.
However, as there was no response, she filed OA. No.1418 of 2018 before this
Tribunal which came to be disposed of vide order dated 24.10.2018 with directions to
the respondents therein to consider and pass order on her representations dated
10.04.2018 and 17.04.2018. Pursuant thereto, the respondent has passed speaking
order dated 17.08.2019 rejecting her requests which is challenged herein.

4 of 11
3. The learned counsel for the applicant argued that in the impugned order dated
17/08/2019, for the workload upto 75 points, the TRCA slab is Rs. 2745-50-4245
w.e.f. 01/01/2006 and for workload upto 87.5 points, the TRCA slab is 3200-60-5000
w.e.f. 01/01/2006. As per the workload done as on 18/05/2018, the total workload
points for the post of BPM is 78.83 and therefore, the pay had to be revised and
refixed in the slab of Rs.3200-60-5,000 w.e.f. 01/10/2015. Accordingly, the
applicant's pay had been rightly fixed in the slab of Rs.3200-60-5,000, but drawn
only Rs.2745-50-4245. Therefore, fixing the slab of the applicant as Rs.2745-50-
4245 w.e.f. 1-10-2015 and fixing the corresponding replacement TRCA slab as per
th
the recommendation of the 7 CPC fixation is not correct. Therefore, she has filed
this Original Application for the aforestated relief.
4. The respondents state that the total points earned by the applicant in the review

for the year 2013 is 68.77 which is less than 75 points. Hence, the TCRA has been
re-fixed in the slab of 2745-50-4245 w.e.f 01.10.2014. Meanwhile, in connection
with a misconduct, punishment order dated 22/04/2015 was issued to the effect that
the TRCA of the applicant be reduced by one stage from Rs.4990 to the stage of
Rs.4920 in the slab of TRCA of Rs.3660-70-5760 for a period of three years three
months w.e.f. 01.05.2015. It is also ordered that the applicant will earn increment of
TRCA during the period of reduction and that on expiry of this period, the reduction
will not have the effect of postponing her future increment of TRCA. However, the
Postmaster, Dharmapuri HO has not revised the TRCA of the applicant with effect

5 of 11
from 01.10.2015 inadvertently. Further, the applicant was inadvertently granted
annual increase of Rs.70/- on 01.04.2015 during the period of protection of TRCA.

Consequently, applicant has drawn the same TRCA of Rs.4920/- instead of Rs.4245

from October 2015 to April, 2017. When the omission was detected later, the
Postmaster, Dharmapuri HO has reduced the TRCA slab from Rs.3660-70-5760 to
Rs.2745-50-4245 w.e.f. May-2017. Subsequently, as the punishment issued vide
order dated 22.04.2015 becomes inoperative due to reduction of TRCA of applicant, a
corrigendum was issued vide memo dated 31.03.2023 stating as under: -
“ TRCA of Smt. A.Vennila, GDSBPM, Maniyambadi BO a/w
Kadathur SO has been revised from the slab Rs.3660-70-5760 to Rs.2745-
50-4245 w.e.f 01.10.2014 vide SPOs memo no. A/TRCA/digs dated
21.11.2014. As per Directorate letter no: 5-1/07-WS-I dated 15.10.2012
protection of TRCA has been given to the GDS for the period from
01.10.2014 to 30.09.2015. Hence, the following corrigendum is being
issued.
"The stage of TRCA mentioned in this office punishment order dated
22.04.2015 of Smt. A.Vennila, GDSBPM, Maniyambadi BO a/w Kadathur
SO may kindly read as reduced by one stage from Rs.4920/- to the stage of
Rs.4850/- in the scale of TRCA of Rs.3660-70-5760 w.e.f 01.05.2015 to
30.09.2015 and after completion of protection of TRCA for period of one
year, consequent upon reduction of her TRCA slab, her TRCA be reduced
by one stage as Rs.4195/- from Rs.4245/- in the scale of TRCA 2745-50-
4245 w.e.f 01.10.2015 to 31.07.2018 instead of TRCA of Smt. A. Vennila,
GDSBPM, Maniyambadi BO a/w Kadathur SO be reduced by one stage
from Rs.4990/- to the stage of Rs.4920/- in the scale of TRCA of Rs.3660-
70-5760 for a period of Three years and three months w.e.f 01.05.15."

6 of 11
5. It is stated by the respondent that the actual TRCA slab of the applicant was Rs 2745-
50-4245 and the applicant was inadvertently drawn TRCA in the slab of Rs.3660-70-5760
w.e.f . 01.10.2015 to 30.04.2017 and drawn total TRCA as Rs 4920/-(Basic TRCA)+6150
(applicable DA) +100 (Office maintenance allowance) +25(Fixed Stationery Charge)-Rs
11,195/- instead of the maximum TRCA level in the slab of Rs 2745-50-4245 of Rs.4245/-
(Basic TRCA)+5052/-(applicable DA)+100(Office maintenance allowance) + 25(Fixed
Stationery Charge) Rs 9422/-. Further it is submitted that the TRCA has been re-fixed as
per the corrigendum issued on the punishment order vide SPOs memo No. F1/2/IV/2014-15
dated 31.03.2023 by the Postmaster, Dharmapuri HO. Hence, the excess amount of Rs.
33820/- paid to the applicant is to be recovered from the applicant.
6. The counsel for the respondents argued that since the applicant's TRCA was
fixed at Rs.4,245 w.e.f. 01/10/2015 at the maximum stage in the TRCA scale of
Rs.2,745-50-4,245, the applicant is not entitled to any further increase. In view of
stagnation in the slab, no increment was drawn by her. Since the TRCA of the
applicant has been fixed based on the workload of the office, the TRCA slab fixation
for the applicant is justified and correct.
7. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels on both
sides and perused the material on record.
8. As per letter of Government of India, Department of Posts dated 09/10/2009,
the TRCA slabs corresponding to workload points are as under:

7 of 11
Category TRCA slab w.e.f
Workload points
01.01.2006
GDS Branch
Postmaster
2745-50-4245 Upto75 points
3200-60-5000 More than 75 point to
87.5 points
3660-70-5760 More than 87.5 points to
100 points
4115-75-6365 More than 100 points to
112.5 points
4575-85-7125 More than 112.5 points to
125 points
9. In the memo dated 30/08/2010 (Annexure R-1) issued by the respondent, the
scale of pay of the applicant is shown as Rs.3660-70-5760. It is stated by the
respondent that the total points earned by the applicant as per the review for the year
2013 is 68.77 which is less than 75 points and therefore, the TRCA of applicant was
refixed in the slab of Rs.2,745-50-4,245 with effect from 01/10/2014 and protection
of pay was given to the applicant for the period from 01/10/2014 to 30/9/2015.
However, due to inadvertence, after the period of pay protection granted to the
applicant got over on 30/09/2015, the TRCA of the applicant was not revised by the
Postmaster, Dharmapuri HO with effect from 01.10.2015. With the result, from
01/10/2015 upto 30/04/2017, the applicant continued to draw the same TRCA of
Rs.4920/- in the scale of TRCA of Rs.3,660-3,700-3,760, instead of TRCA of
Rs.4245/- in the scale of Rs.2,745-50-4,245. Consequently, the TRCA slab of the
applicant was wrongly shown in the punishment order dated 22/04/2015 (Annexure
R-3) as Rs.3,660-3,700-3,760, instead of Rs.2,745-50-4,245, and accordingly, it was

8 of 11
wrongly ordered that applicant’s TRCA be reduced by one stage from Rs.4,990 to the
stage of Rs.4,920 in the scale of TRCA of Rs.3,660-3,700-3,760 for a period of 3
years and 3 months, instead of ordering reduction by one stage from Rs.4245/- to
Rs.4195/- in the scale of Rs.2745-50-4245 w.e.f 01.10.2015 to 31.07.2018.
Therefore, the punishment order was modified by issuing Corrigendum dated
31/03/2023 to the above effect. Hence, the excess paid amount of TRCA amounting
to Rs.33820/- for the period from 01.10.2015 to 30.04.2017 had to be recovered from
the applicant.
10. It is stated by the applicant that in the subsequent triennial review held for the
year 2017, the total workload points earned by her was 78.83 which is more than 75
th
points and that her pay had to be regulated as per the 7 CPC by taking into account
the workload done for the year 2017. Applicant further states that though she is
entiled for annual increment, the same has been denied to her.
11. In this regard, it is stated by the respondents that since applicant was under
currency of punishment for a period of three years and three months from 01.10.2015
to 31.07.2018, the upward revision of TRCA of the applicant was not considered.
Further, applicant has drawn TRCA of Rs.4245/- which is the maximum TRCA in the
slab of Rs.2745-50-4245 and hence, she was not eligible for any increment.

9 of 11
th
12. It is observed that the 7 CPC was implemented by the Department of posts on
the recommendations of One-Man Committee headed by Sh. Kamlesh Chandra w.e.f.
th
01/01/2016. The applicant was thus entitled to TRCA revision as per 7 CPC pay
fixation with effect from 01/01/2016. The respondents could not have deferred
th
making revision in the TRCA of the applicant as per 7 CPC fixation. However, it is
admitted by the respondents that the corresponding replacement of TRCA slab of
th
Rs. 12,000-29,380 as per 7 CPC fixation has been given to the applicant only with
effect from 01/08/2018 after the expiry of punishment.

th
13. In the light of implementation of 7 CPC/ the Revised (Pay) Rules, 2016, the
DOPT has issued OM dated 18/06/2019 providing for regulation of pay on
imposition of a penatty, and states that on imposition of a penalty of reduction to a
lower stage of pay by one stage, the pay would be fixed at the next upper vertical cell
in the same level in the pay matrix. ln other words, in case of reduction by one stage,
the revised pay would be the pay drawn in the same level at the stage before the last
increment. Accordingly, the respondents should have notionally fixed the applicant's
th
basic TRCA in the 7 CPC slab of Rs.12000-29380/- w.e.f 01/01/2016, and worked
out the revised pay as per penalty order by reducing that pay by one stage. Since the
penalty order allowed applicant to earn increment of pay during the period of
reduction, the respondents should have granted the increment on notional basis
during the currency of penalty and restored her actual revised pay after the penalty
ceased to operate w.e.f. 01/08/2018.

10 of 11
14. It is observed that the respondents issued Corrigendum dated 31/03/2023
belatedly after 8 years modifying the punishment order dated 22/04/2015 without
th
considering the 7 CPC pay eventhough it was implemented w.e.f. 01/01/2016. Since
the applicant was entitled for new TRCA slab of Rs.12000-29380/- w.e.f 01/01/2016,
and was also entitled to increment in the new scale, the arguments of the respondents
that since applicant’s TRCA got fixed at Rs.4245/- w.e.f. 01/10/2015 at the maximum

stage in the TRCA scale of Rs.2745-50-4245 and hence applicant is not entitled for
any further increment in view of stagnation in the slab, does not hold any water.

15. As noted above, as per punishment order dated 22/04/2015, though the
applicant’s TRCA was reduced by one stage w.e.f. 01/05/2015, nevertheless, in view
th

of the implementation of 7 CPC pay in the slab of Rs.12000-29380/- w.e.f.
01/01/2016, applicant was entitled to that pay w.e.f. 01/01/2016 and the Corrigendum
issued by the respondents belatedly on 31/03/2023 should have reflected the correct
th
TRCA of the applicant as per 7 CPC pay as well as her reduced pay by one stage in
the corresponding TRCA in the new slab of Rs.12000-29380/- w.e.f 01/01/2016.
16. It is also pertinent to note that since respondents had started recovering a sum
of ₹2,000 from the TRCA of the applicant from the month of December 2022
alleging excess payment albeit without issuing any notice or order in writing, this
Tribunal, vide order dated 17/05/2023, had granted interim order directing the
respondents not to recover any amount from the TRCA of the applicant.

11 of 11
17. In view of the foregoing observations, we are of the view that applicant was
th
entitled for re-fixation of her TRCA as per 7 CPC pay fixation in the slab of
Rs.12000-29380/- w.e.f. 01/01/2016, and also for annual increment during the period
of reduction of pay as per the penalty order dated 22/04/2015. Hence, recovery of
excess payment of Rs.25894/- is flawed and untenable. Moreover, it is also
contended by the applicant that the respondents could not have recovered Rs.25894/-
alleging excess payment in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih [(2015) 4 SCC 334] (White Washer case).
18. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 17/08/2019 is hereby quashed and set
aside. The respondents are directed to revise and refix applicant's TRCA in the light
of the above observations within a period of three months from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order. The interim order of this Tribunal dated 17/05/2023 is made
absolute. The amount, if any, already recovered by the respondent from the TRCA of
the applicant shall be refunded within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order. Failure to refund the amount within the specified period shall
entail interest at the rate of 6% till the entire amount is refunded. OA is disposed of
accordingly. Pending MAs, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. There shall be
no order on costs.
(Sisir Kumar Ratho) (Veena Kothavale)
Member(A) Member(J)
17.09.2026
asvs
Digitally signed by ASAPU
SRINIVASA VIDYASAGAR
Date: 2026.10.16 13:24:03
+05'30'
A.S.V. Sagar
P.S., CAT,
Chennai Bench.