Prior GDS service cannot be counted to ante-date a Postman appointment.

The applicant was engaged as a Gramin Dak Sevak (GDS) on 22 December 1981 and was later appointed as a Postman in 2009 against a vacancy of 2006 under the seniority quota. He contended that the appointment had been delayed for administrative reasons and sought to have its effective date advanced to 2006.

He retired on 31 March 2018 and filed the Original Application after making representations in 2018.

The respondents opposed the application, relying on delay and on the rule that GDS service could not be counted for pensionary purposes.

Whether the applicant was entitled to have his Postman appointment antedated to 2006, when the vacancy arose.

Whether the applicant’s claim was barred by delay or defeated by the rule that GDS service could not be reckoned for pensionary purposes.

The Tribunal relied on Union of India v. Gandiba Behera, (2021) 14 SCC 786, for the principle that there is no legal provision permitting service rendered as a GDS to be reckoned for pension or pensionary benefits.

The order identifies no statute or other legal provision governing retrospective appointment or the effect of delay.

The applicant’s claim arose from the asserted delay in appointing him as a Postman against the 2006 vacancy. The Tribunal accepted the respondents’ reliance on Gandiba Behera and held that the decision applied to the case; it also noted the objection that the application had been brought belatedly.

The order does not separately explain how the rule concerning GDS service and pensionary benefits resolved the claim to antedate the Postman appointment.

No costs were ordered.