Facts
The applicants, initially appointed as Reserved Trained Pool (RTP) Postal Assistants between 1982-1984 after undergoing a selection process, sought pay and allowances equivalent to regular postal assistants, along with seniority and other financial benefits.
Source reference: p.3, p.4They were initially paid hourly rates of Rs. 2.75.
Source reference: p.4Their services were subsequently regularized, and they eventually retired on their respective superannuation dates.
Source reference: p.4The applicants made several representations to the department for equal pay and benefits, relying on decisions from the Jabalpur Bench (TA No. 82/26, 16.12.1986) and the Hyderabad Bench (15.04.2015) which granted regularization and counted RTP service for benefits.
Source reference: p.3, p.4A legal notice/representation dated 08.12.2025 was served on the respondents but remained undecided.
Source reference: p.5Issues
1. Whether the applicants are entitled to the same pay and allowances as regular postal assistants for the period they discharged duties as RTP Postal Assistants.
Source reference: p.32. Whether the applicants are entitled to seniority, bonus, House Rent, City Compensatory Allowances, annual increments, earned leave, wages for holidays, gazetted holidays wages for lunch break, and all other financial benefits available to regular postal assistants in the Reserved Trained Pool.
Source reference: p.33. Whether the services rendered by the RTP employees should be counted for granting initial upgradation and time-bound promotion, aligning with previous judgments by the Jabalpur and Hyderabad Benches.
Source reference: p.34. Whether the legal notice/representation dated 08.12.2025 should be decided by the respondents in a time-bound manner.
Source reference: p.5Law Applied
The application was filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
Source reference: p.3The decision making process was by consent of the parties.
Source reference: p.5The relief sought was based on the principle of parity with regular employees and benefits granted in similar cases by other benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal, specifically Jabalpur Bench in TA No. 82/26 dated 16.12.1986 and Hyderabad Bench vide order dated 15.04.2015, concerning regularization and counting of RTP services for promotion and upgradation.
Source reference: p.3, p.4Reasoning
The Tribunal noted that the applicants had served a legal notice/representation dated 08.12.2025 to the respondents, which had not yet been decided.
Source reference: p.5During the hearing, the learned counsel for the applicants expressed satisfaction if this representation was decided in a time-bound manner.
Source reference: p.5Crucially, the learned Senior CGSC, appearing for the respondents, indicated no objection to such a disposal.
Source reference: p.5This agreement between the parties rendered a detailed merits-based analysis unnecessary at this stage, focusing instead on ensuring administrative action on the pending representation.
Source reference: p.5The Tribunal's decision was therefore procedural, directing the competent authority to address the existing representation without commenting on the substantive merits of the claims for equal pay, allowances, and other benefits.
Source reference: p.5Holding
The OA was disposed of without commenting on the merits of the case.
The competent authority among the respondents was directed to decide the legal notice/representation dated 08.12.2025 (Annexure A-1), submitted by the applicants, as per rules, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.
Source reference: p.5, p.6No costs were imposed.
Source reference: p.6Original Court PDF
Sukhpal Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. [OA 60/212/2026]
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in