Manjula Das, Judicial Member.
1. By this O.A. filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 the, applicant is seeking following reliefs:-
“8.1 Direct the respondents to grant 2nd MACP to the applicant w.e.f. 28.12.2014 i.e. after completion of 20 years of service from the date of entry into the P.A. Cadre with all consequential benefits.
8.2 Direct the respondents to re-fix the basic pay off the applicant after grant of 2nd MACP w.e.f. 28.12.2014 with consequential re-fixation in subsequent years with all benefits.
8.3 Direct the respondents to recalculate the pension, commuted value of pension, retirement gratuity, cash equivalent to leave salary etc. taking into consideration the re-fixed basic pay after grant of 2nd MACP w.e.f. 28.12.2014 and release the arrear payments forthwith with all consequential benefits.
8.4 Cost of the application.
8.5 Pass any such order/orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper.”
2. Mr. H.K. Das, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was initially appointed as GDS BPM at Kajalgaon BO in September 1982 and after successfully appearing in the Postman Examination and on completion of his training, the applicant was posted at New Bongaigaon SO as Postman vide memo dated 31.08.1988. Learned counsel further submitted that after having declared successful in the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination (LDCE in short) held on 23.05.1994 for Postal Assistant/ Sorting Assistant and on completion of training, he was posted as Postal Assistant at Kokrajhar SO vide order dated 09.12.1994. In the gradation list of Postal Assistant of Goalpara Division as on 01.07.2005 applicant’s name figured at Sl.No.134 and his date of entry in the cadre of Postal Assistant is shown as 28.12.1994.
3. Learned counsel further submits that vide order dated 16.03.2010, applicant was granted 1st MACP in the scale of Pay Band-I (Rs.5200-20200) with Grade Pay of Rs.2800/- on completion of 10 years w.e.f. 01.09.2008. According to the learned counsel, similarly situated employees, namely Sri Parimal Chandra Roy, Sri Debashish Deka, Sri Hafizur Rahman Ahmed, Sri Abdur Rahim Ahmed, Mrs Juma Ray, Sri Madhab Chandra Rabha, Sri Sanjay Kumar Agarwal and Mrs Ajanta Hato were given 2nd MACP vide order dated 08.12.2015 on completion of 20 years of service taking into consideration the date of entry into the cadre of Postal Assistant as an effective date for calculation of 20 years of service. Learned counsel further submits that vide order dated 10.04.2017 similarly situated employees, namely, Sri Hemanta Tallukdar, Sri Sunil Basumatary, Sri Sudip Paul and Sri Amarendra Ray were granted 2nd MACP on completion of 20 years from the date of entry in the cadre of Postal Assistant. The dates of entry in the cadre of Postal Assistant in respect of above four Postal Assistants are 07.05.1996, 04.07.1996, 25.09.1996 and 25.03.1997 respectively. In cases if above Postal Assistants 20 years of service for the purpose of MACP was counted from the date of entry in Postal Assistant cadre. According to the applicant, applicant’s date of entry in Postal Assistant Cadre is 28.12.1994 and as such he completed 20 years on 28.12.2014, therefore, applicant is entitled to 2nd MACP from the said date. However, the respondents did not grant him the 2nd MACP and in the meantime, applicant retired from service w.e.f. 28.02.2018 on attaining the age of superannuation. The applicant submitted application on 16.09.2016 for grant of 2nd MACP on completion of 20 years in the post of Postal Assistant i.e. 28.12.2014, however, the respondents have neither disposed of the same nor granted him 2nd MACP till date.
4. According the learned counsel, all the similarly situated persons like the applicant are enjoying the benefits of 2nd MACP getting higher pay matrix 6 after completion of 20 years from the date of entry in the Postal Assistant Cadre, however, applicant has been illegally denied such benefits. Learned counsel submits that the denial of benefit of 2nd MACP has caused chain action in the pay of the applicant followed by reduction in his amount of final pension, gratuity, leave salary, commuted value of pension etc., therefore, it is a case of continuous cause of action and accordingly there is no limitation in approaching the court.
5. Since the applicant is a pensioner, for the ends of speedy justice, instead of issuing notice to the respondents we deem it fit to send back the matter to the respondents for a decision at their end at the earliest. Accordingly, without issuing any notice to the respondents an
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
d going to the merits of the case, we direct the applicant to submit this OA along with a copy of this order to the respondents within a period of 15 (fifteen) days from the date of receipt of this order. On receipt of the same, the respondents are directed to treat the OA as a comprehensive representation of the applicant and consider and dispose of expeditiously within a period of two months thereafter. 6. The OA is disposed of accordingly at the admission stage itself. There shall be no order as to costs.