Rules, Rights & Rites -145
I usually post all important items related to official rulings, union news, and other general matters on my YouTube channels: Yourskayveeyes (English) and Anbudan Kayveeyes (Tamil).
However, due to the recent spate of orders and the high volume of information being received, I have not been able to convert every item into a video. Therefore, I am introducing these new slots to post current matters and updates that have not yet been published on YouTube. This ensures you stay informed on every detail, even if a video hasn't been made yet …………….Kayveeyes
Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Chandigarh Bench on RTP Service benefits
• in the case of Sukhpal Singh & Others vs. Union of India & Others (OA 60/212/2026), decided on February 19, 2026, the Tribunal first addressed MA 576/2026, allowing 13 applicants to prosecute the Original Application (OA) jointly, as they shared a common cause of action and sought identical relief.
• Former employees who served as Reserved Trained Pool (RTP) Postal Assistants between 1982 and 1984, subsequently absorbed as regular Postal Assistants/SA between 1982 and 1989, and have since retired.
• The applicants sought three primary benefits:
• Parity in pay and allowances with regular Postal Assistants for the period they served in the Reserved Trained Pool.
• Grant of seniority, bonuses, House Rent Allowance (HRA), City Compensatory Allowance (CCA), annual increments, and leave benefits.
• Counting the period of RTP service toward regular service for the purposes of initial upgradation and time-bound promotions, citing precedents from the Jabalpur and Hyderabad Benches of the Tribunal.
• The applicants were selected through a regular process but initially appointed under the RTP scheme on an hourly wage of Rs. 2.75 per hour, which was significantly lower than the pay of regular staff.
• The applicants argued that since they were appointed against regular vacant posts and underwent the requisite training, their RTP service should be counted for all service-related benefits.
• They had previously submitted a legal notice/representation on December 8, 2025, which remained undecided by the Department.
• During the hearing, the counsel for the respondents (Union of India) stated they had no objection to deciding the applicants' pending representation in a time-bound manner.
• Without commenting on the merits of the case, the Tribunal disposed of the OA with a direction to the competent authority to:
o Decide the legal notice/representation dated 08.12.2025.
o Pass the decision in accordance with existing rules.
o Complete the process within three months from the receipt of the certified copy of the order.
• No costs were awarded.
Post a Comment