Benefit of BCR Scheme is to be extended from the date the employee completes 26 years of service,

Benefit of BCR Scheme is to be extended from the date the employee completes 26 years of service,
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ,ERNAKULAM BENCH

O.A. NO.792/2010

Dated this the 16th day of May, 2011

C O R A M

HON'BLE Mrs.K. NOORJEHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

T.P.Sukumara Pilla, S/o late Parameswara Panicker Parvathy Bhavan, Kadayanikkad P.O,
Kangazha-686541, Kottayam. Applicants
By Advocate Mr P.K.Madhusoodhanan
Vs

1 Superintendent of Post Offices, Changanassery
Division, Changanassery - 686101.

2 The Assistant Director (Staff), Department
of Posts, O/o the Post Master General,
Central Region, Kochi - 682018.

3 Chief Post Master General, Department
of Posts, Kerala Circle, Trivandrum-695033.

4 Union of India, represented by its Secretary
Govt of India, Mini.of Communications, Deptt.
Of Posts, Dak Bhavan, Sansad Marg, NewDelhi-1..
Respondents
By Advocate Mr.M.K.Aboobacker, ACGSC.

The Application having been heard on 1.3.2011 the Tribunal delivered the following:
O R D E R

HON'BLE Mrs.K.NOORJEHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER


In this O.A the applicant is aggrieved by the denial of benefits of Biennial Cadre Review (BCR for short) Scheme though he had completed 26 years of service and has sought a direction to the spondents to grant him the benefits of BCR on completion of 26 years of regular service.
2 Brief facts of the case as stated by the applicants are that the applicant entered the service as Extra Departmental Delivery Agent on 19.1.1967. On passing the departmental examination he was promoted as Postman on 13.3.74. Thereafter he was promoted as Clerk on 24.11.1981. He was given Time Bound Onetime Promotion on completion of 16 years of service w.e.f 29.11.1997. While he was working as Sub-postmaster, Kangazha , on attaining the age of superannuation, he retired on 31.12.2007. Having completed 26 years service on 29.11.2007 the applicant became eligible for grant of higher pay scale as a benefit under the BCR Scheme, but he was not granted the same. Hence theO.A.
3 The respondents contested the O.A. It is submitted that the Biennial Cadre Review was introduced in the Department w.e.f 1.10.1991. It was intended to provide a second financial up- gradation to those officials who have completed 26 years of satisfactory qualifying service, linked to posts identified for such up gradation on the crucial dates. This scheme is implemented by earmarking two crucial dates viz. 1st January and 1st July every year, by taking into account the list of officials who have completed 26 or more years of service as on these dates, subject to their otherwise being found fit. It is submitted that the conditions for BCR placement prescribe completion of 26 years of qualifying service which in the case of the applicant is on 18.12.2007 after deducting the non-qualifying service. On the crucial date of review on 1.7.2007 the applicant had not completed 26 years of service. On the next date of review on 1.1.08 he had superannuated from service. The Screening Committee for placement under BCR was held on 4.6.08 and his name was not included as he was not on duty on the cut-off date of 1.1.2008. Therefore the applicant was not granted the BCR placement. There was no willful negligence or omission on the part of the respondents in granting the said benefit to the applicant.

4 Rejoinder to the reply was filed by the applicant disputing the date he has completed 26 years qualifying service on 18.12.2007. He submitted that the non-qualifying service of 24 days in the cadre of Postal Assistant on the occasion of general strikes of postal employees has been decided (Annx.A4) to treat it as Earned Leave. Accordingly the applicant has applied for Earned Leave for 14 days vide Annx.A6.
5 Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6 The issue whether the benefits under the BCR Scheme dated 11.9.1991 are to be granted from the date of completion of 26 years of satisfactory service or from the crucial dates of 1st January or 1st July, as the case may be, has been decided by the CAT Lucknow Bench in A.L.Pal Vs. UOI 2002(1)ATJ 298 and by the CAT Mumbai Bench in K.G.Patil Vs. UOI, 2003(3) ATJ 594. It was held that the benefit of BCR Scheme is to be extended from the date the employee completes 26 years of service.

6 The issue involved in this OA was already under consideration before this Tribunal in OA 430/09, K.Sasidharan Nair Vs. Sr.Superintendent, RMS 'TV' Division, Trivandrum & Ors and by order dated 5.1.2010 this Tribunal held as under:
" Accordingly the O.A is allowed. Annx.A7 order is set aside to the extent it denies the benefits of the BCR scheme to the applicant. The respondents are directed to include the name of the applicant in Annx.A5 list for grant of the BCR benefits w.e.f. 10.9.2007 and grant him all consequential benefits within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs."


8 In view of the above position, I follow the order of this Tribunal in OA 430/2009. Accordingly the O.A is allowed. Annx.A3 order is set aside to the extent it denies the benefits of the BCR scheme to the applicant. The respondents are directed to grant the BCR benefits w.e.f. 4.12.2007, in view of Annx.A4 order and the fact that he applied for EL for 14 days (Annx.A6) and grant him all consequential benefits within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.

(K.NOORJEHAN)