Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 684 views

    In The Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh

    Uploaded by

    K V Sridharan General Secretary P3 NFPE
    1. The Central Administrative Tribunal was hearing a case regarding benefits under the Biennial Cadre Review (BCR) scheme for government employees. 2. Previously, the Tribunal had referred questions about the BCR scheme to a Full Bench of the Tribunal for clarification. 3. However, the Full Bench had already decided those questions in another case, determining that employees are entitled to BCR benefits from the date they complete 26 years of service. 4. Therefore, the Tribunal reviewed its order referring the questions to the Full Bench, followed the decision of the Full Bench, and allowed the applicant's case, granting BCR benefits from the date he completed 26 years of service.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    In The Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh

    Uploaded by

    K V Sridharan General Secretary P3 NFPE
    684 views2 pages
    1. The Central Administrative Tribunal was hearing a case regarding benefits under the Biennial Cadre Review (BCR) scheme for government employees. 2. Previously, the Tribunal had referred questions about the BCR scheme to a Full Bench of the Tribunal for clarification. 3. However, the Full Bench had already decided those questions in another case, determining that employees are entitled to BCR benefits from the date they complete 26 years of service. 4. Therefore, the Tribunal reviewed its order referring the questions to the Full Bench, followed the decision of the Full Bench, and allowed the applicant's case, granting BCR benefits from the date he completed 26 years of service.

    Original Title

    in the central administrative tribunal - chandigarh

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. The Central Administrative Tribunal was hearing a case regarding benefits under the Biennial Cadre Review (BCR) scheme for government employees. 2. Previously, the Tribunal had referred questions about the BCR scheme to a Full Bench of the Tribunal for clarification. 3. However, the Full Bench had already decided those questions in another case, determining that employees are entitled to BCR benefits from the date they complete 26 years of service. 4. Therefore, the Tribunal reviewed its order referring the questions to the Full Bench, followed the decision of the Full Bench, and allowed the applicant's case, granting BCR benefits from the date he completed 26 years of service.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    684 views2 pages

    In The Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh

    Uploaded by

    K V Sridharan General Secretary P3 NFPE
    1. The Central Administrative Tribunal was hearing a case regarding benefits under the Biennial Cadre Review (BCR) scheme for government employees. 2. Previously, the Tribunal had referred questions about the BCR scheme to a Full Bench of the Tribunal for clarification. 3. However, the Full Bench had already decided those questions in another case, determining that employees are entitled to BCR benefits from the date they complete 26 years of service. 4. Therefore, the Tribunal reviewed its order referring the questions to the Full Bench, followed the decision of the Full Bench, and allowed the applicant's case, granting BCR benefits from the date he completed 26 years of service.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    IN THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

    CHANDIGARH BENCH

    SUO MOTO REVIEW


    IN OA NO. 563/PB/2004
    O.A. NO. 1016/2001

    Chandigarh: this 17th day of February, 2005

    Om Parkash Bhagat s/o Shri Gian Chand


    Assistant Sub Postmaster (Retd)
    Now R/o 3540/14, Gali No. 13, Haripura
    P.O. Jawala Flour Mills, Amritsar
    …..Applicant

    (By Shri C.L. Gupta, Advocate)


    -Versus-

    1. Union of India, Ministry of Communication


    & I.T. through Secretary-cum-Director General,
    Department of Posts,
    New Delhi -110001
    2. Chief Postmaster General, Punjab Circle
    Chandigarh
    3. Senior Superintendent Post Offices,
    Amritsar Division, Amritsar

    ……..Respondents
    (By: Shri Deepak Agnihotri, Advocate)

    ORDER

    ( By: Hon’ble Mr. Kuldip Singh, Vice Chairman)

    This Bench while hearing OA No. 563/PB/2004 had observed that since there was divergent
    opinion expressed in various judgments, the judicial discipline require that the matter be
    referred to be Full Bench and the following question was referred to be Full Bench:-

    a) Whether an employee covered under BCR Scheme is entitled to the benefit of


    promotion from the date he completes 26 years of service or from the date when
    DPC recommends the case of the applicant.
    b) Whether the circular dated 31-10-95 vide which the instructions have been issued to
    hold DPC meeting twice in year is violative of the original BCR Scheme issued on
    11-10-1991.
    2. This order was passed on 12th January, 2005. However, vide order dated 14th
    January, 2005 in OA No. 7/JK/2003, a Full Bench of this Tribunal had decided the
    same controversy and rendered the second reference on the same issue futile
    exercise.
    3. Since the Full Bench decision has been brought to our notice now, we take suo moto
    action to review the order passed in OA No. 563/PB/2004.

    4. We also called Shri C.L. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Deepak
    Agnihotri, learned counsel for the respondents and heard them also.

    5. It appears that they were also not aware that controversy referred by us to the Full
    Bench had also been referred at Jammu during circuit sitting nor they were aware
    that the matter had already been heard. The question referred to the Full Bench was
    "whether the benefits under BCR Scheme dated 11-10-1991 are to be granted from
    the date one completes 26 years of satisfactory service OR from the crucial dates of
    1st January or 1st July, as the case may be, which is based on the Biennial Cadre
    Review of posts to be placed against such identified for upgradation from these
    crucial dates each year as per subsequent clarifications." The Hon'ble Full Bench
    answered the question in the following manner:-

    "The benefit under the Biennial Cadre Review Scheme dated 11-10-1991 has to be
    granted from the date one completes 26 years of satisfactory service."

    6. Whether an employee covered under BCR Scheme is entitled to the benefit of


    promotion from the date he completes 26 years of service or from the date when the
    DPC recommends the case of the applicant. Since the Full Bench has decided the
    question, we are of the considered opinion that reference on the same question
    again to the Full Bench has been rendered meaningless and we can follow the
    decision given by the Full Bench in this OA also. Accordingly, we review our order
    dated 12-01-2005 vide which we had referred the matter to the Full Bench. Now,
    since the Full Bench has also decided the issue, we can proceed to decide the OA
    itself. As the Full Bench had answered that an employee is entitled for grant of
    benefit under the BCR from the date one completes 26 years of satisfactory service,
    we hold that in this case also the applicant is entitled for the grant of BCR benefit
    from the date he has completed 26 years of satisfactory service. As such, we allow
    the OA and hold that the applicant is entitled to the grant of benefit under BCR
    scheme w.e.f. 12-01-2002 on which date he completed 26 years of satisfactory
    service with all consequential benefits. The OA is disposed of accordingly.

    Sd/- Sd/-
    ( L.M. MEHTA) (KULDIP SINGH)
    MEMBER (A) VICE CHAIRMAN

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy