Regular LSG promotion cannot be nullified by TBOP/BCR options; seniority accrues from the original promotion date.

The applicant joined the Department of Posts as a Clerk/Postal Assistant on 10 August 1970 and qualified the PO & RMS Accountant Examination in 1979.

He was promoted as Assistant Postmaster (Accounts), Lower Selection Grade (LSG), by order dated 15 October 1991 and assumed charge on 21 November 1991.

In earlier proceedings, the Tribunal directed reconsideration of his seniority and consequential promotion claims; in O.A. No. 15/HP/2005, it specifically held that his regular LSG promotion under the prevailing rules could not be taken away by treating him as a Postal Assistant under the TBOP/BCR schemes.

Upon reconsideration, the respondents rejected the applicant’s claim by letter dated 16 April 2014, primarily relying on his failure to exercise the prescribed options under departmental instructions.

The applicant challenged that rejection under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

Whether the applicant was entitled to LSG seniority with effect from 21 November 1991, when he assumed charge as Assistant Postmaster (Accounts) (LSG), notwithstanding the TBOP/BCR option provisions.

Whether the respondents could reject the applicant’s claim by reiterating grounds already considered and rejected in the Tribunal’s earlier orders, without giving effect to those findings.

Whether the applicant was entitled to consequential consideration for promotion to HSG Grade-II and HSG Grade-I, together with consequential service and retiral benefits.

The application was maintainable under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

The Tribunal applied the 1976 service rules governing promotion to LSG, HSG Grade-II and HSG Grade-I, along with the departmental instructions governing the TBOP/BCR schemes and the options available to PO & RMS Accountants.

The governing principle was that a promotion regularly granted under the rules applicable at the relevant time could not subsequently be withdrawn or reduced merely because the employee was given, or was deemed to have exercised, an option under a financial-upgradation scheme; the benefit already earned as an LSG official had to be preserved.

The Tribunal also relied on its binding findings in the applicant’s earlier proceedings that TBOP/BCR treatment did not extinguish service rendered in LSG and that there was no impermissible distinction between the Accounts Line and the General Line for the relevant promotional consideration.

Administrative reconsideration pursuant to a judicial direction had to meaningfully address and comply with the earlier judicial findings and could not merely reproduce grounds already rejected.

The Tribunal found that the applicant had been regularly promoted as Assistant Postmaster (Accounts) (LSG) under the rules prevailing in 1991 and had assumed charge on 21 November 1991.

Its earlier decisions had already determined that such promotion could not be nullified or postponed on the ground that the applicant had opted, or was deemed to have opted, for TBOP/BCR benefits.

Although the respondents were required to reconsider the matter after the High Court proceedings, the order dated 16 April 2014 did not engage with those findings and merely relied on the applicant’s non-exercise of the prescribed options.

The Tribunal held that this was not genuine compliance with the earlier directions and that the respondents could not reopen issues already concluded between the parties.

Accordingly, the applicant’s LSG seniority had to be recognised from 21 November 1991, followed by consideration for further promotion under the 1976 Rules.

The rejection letter dated 16 April 2014 was quashed and set aside.

The respondents were directed to treat the applicant as entitled to LSG seniority with effect from 21 November 1991 and to consider and grant all consequential benefits, including consideration for promotion to HSG Grade-II and HSG Grade-I under the 1976 Rules, if otherwise due.

The directions included consequential service, monetary and retiral benefits, including revision of pensionary benefits.

The entire exercise and release of admissible benefits were ordered to be completed within three months of receipt of the certified copy of the order.

No order as to costs was made.