Notional service must be reckoned for consequential retirement benefits when severance is limited to pre-notional service.

The applicant was appointed as a GDS Mail Carrier on 1 November 1979.

Pursuant to directions issued in earlier proceedings concerning filling vacancies in the MTS/Group-D cadre, the respondents issued a selection process providing that appointments would operate retrospectively from the date of occurrence of vacancies and would be granted notionally from that date.

The applicant was selected and appointed as a Group-D/MTS employee by orders dated 18 and 21 January 2011, notionally with effect from 1 January 2007, but the appointment orders stated that the notional service would be counted only for pensionary purposes.

The applicant actually assumed charge in January 2011 and was placed under the New Pension Scheme (NPS), since his appointment was treated as being subsequent to 1 January 2004.

His GDS service was treated as ending on 31 December 2006, and he was paid a severance amount of ₹20,000.

He retired on 31 August 2015.

After retirement, he claimed that the notional MTS service from 1 January 2007 to the date of actual assumption of charge should be considered for pay fixation, annual increments, retirement gratuity and other pensionary benefits, and that his GDS service should also qualify for the applicable ex-gratia gratuity.

The respondents contended that the application was barred by limitation and that the notional service could be counted only for pension.

They further stated that the applicant had only 4 years, 7 months and 6 days of qualifying service and was therefore not initially granted retirement gratuity.

They relied on the 1968 departmental instructions requiring at least ten years of continuous satisfactory GDS service for gratuity.

1. Whether the applicant’s notional MTS/Group-D service from 1 January 2007 until his actual assumption of charge could be ignored for determining his retirement and other service benefits, after the respondents had treated his GDS service as ending immediately before the notional appointment date.

2. Whether the applicant was entitled to consideration of retirement gratuity and ex-gratia gratuity by taking into account the notional MTS service and his preceding GDS service.

3. Whether the respondents could restrict the effect of the notional appointment to pensionary purposes while denying its service-related consequences for other benefits.

The Tribunal applied the terms of the selection policy and Annexure A2, particularly the stipulation that appointments were to be made retrospectively from the date of occurrence of vacancies and given notionally from that date.

It also considered the respondents’ reliance on the Government memorandum dated 26 August 2016, under which NPS-covered employees became eligible for retirement and death gratuity on terms applicable to employees under the CCS (Pension) Rules.

The Tribunal further considered the departmental instructions dated 16 January 1968, as amended, providing gratuity to GDS employees whose services were terminated after at least ten years of continuous satisfactory service.

The governing principle applied by the Tribunal was that the respondents could not adopt inconsistent positions—treating the applicant’s GDS service as ending before the notional MTS appointment for payment of severance benefits, while refusing to recognise the corresponding notional MTS period for other service and gratuity benefits.

The Tribunal found that the governing policy contemplated retrospective notional appointment from the date of the vacancy.

Although the appointment orders contained a contrary limitation restricting the notional service to pension purposes, the Tribunal held that such a clause could not be applied inconsistently with the general policy governing the selection.

The payment of severance benefits only up to 31 December 2006 implicitly recognised that the applicant’s GDS service ended immediately before the commencement of his notional MTS service on 1 January 2007.

If the notional service were wholly disregarded, the respondents would instead have had to reckon GDS service up to the applicant’s actual assumption of MTS charge in January 2011.

The Tribunal therefore held that the respondents could not “blow both hot and cold” by recognising the notional period for one purpose and denying it for all other consequential benefits.

The period was required to be considered while determining the applicant’s overall entitlement to service and gratuity benefits.

The respondents were directed to pass appropriate orders within two months of receiving a copy of the order and to pay any amount found due.

Any unpaid amount after that period would carry interest at 8% per annum until payment.

No order was made as to costs.