- (1.) Heard Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Varun Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners. On the matter being taken up today, Sri Pandey, learned Senior Counsel, has informed that the issue involved in this writ petition has already been decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Court by its judgment and order dated 08.07.2019 passed in Writ Petition No. 18482 (S/B) of 2019. The aforesaid order dated 08.07.2019 is reproduced as under:- "1. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Communication, Department of Posts, Government of India, Daak Bhawan, New Delhi and other Government of India functionaries have preferred this writ against an employee who served the petitioners since 23.01.1980 till 13.08.2013 on a Group - D post as a Chaukidar challenging order dated 18.09.2018 rendered in O.A. No.332/00094/2017 titled 'Ramesh Kumar Mishra Vs. Union of India and Ors. by Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow. Vide the impugned order, the original application has been allowed.
(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for Caveator. We have gone through the pleadings and contents of the impugned order.
(3.) It appears that vide order dated 18.09.2018 (supra) a number of original applications were dealt with and allowed, in terms of earlier decisions rendered by various forums mentioned in the order. The relevant content of the impugned order, for reference, is extracted herebelow :- "............ 3.The applicants, by these O.As seek a direction from this Tribunal to direct the respondents to release the pension and other pensionary benefits to the applicant with all consequential benefits along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of due till the actual date of payment. 4. Facts as narrated by the applicant are not in dispute. 4. The applicant, Ramesh Kumar Misra, initially appointed as CP Chowkider at Somaiya Nagar Post Office, Barabanki on 23.01.1980. He was granted temporary status vide order dated 07.01.1993. The applicant retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 13.08.2013. It is the case of the applicant that while, the applicant was in service, he was also allotted a GPF Account No. in January. 1993. When the applicant was not granted the pensionary benefits. then he submitted a representation on 20.07.2016 in view of the decision rendered by this Court in O.A. No 224 of 2013 which was decided on 23.05.2014. He also submitted various representations by which he requested for grant of pensionary benefits, but did not grant the pesionary benefits then he filed the instant O.A. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that this issue has already been settled by this Court which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the applicant has prayed that O.A.may be allowed and respondents be directed to grant all retiral benefits in the light of those judgments. He also produced a copy of judgments passed by the Hon'ble High Court in Writ Petition No. 1578 (SB) of 2017 in the case of Union of India Thru Secretary, Ministry of Communication and Others vs. Jagjivan Singh and Anr decided on 01.08.2018 where similar plea has been decided in favour of respondents therein. Therefore. he prayed that these petitions be allowed in the light of same terms. 6. Learned counsel for respondents is not in a position to cite any law contrary to what has been stated by the learned counsel for the applicant. 7. In the light of the above that there are various judicial pronouncements by this Court deciding the issue in favour of employee, therefore, these O.As are disposed of in terms of decision in case of Amanullah Versus Union of India and Others (O.A. No. 155 of 2012) decided on 4th of April, 2013, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure-A-11 and the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court in Writ Petition No. 1413 (S/B) 2013 by dismissing the Writ Petition in case of Senior Superintendent of Post. Lko. Thru Chhedi Lal Verma vs Amanullah decided on 01.02.2016. The relevant portion of the order passed by this Court and the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court in Writ Petition are extracted hereinbelow: "O.A. No. 155 of 2012 9. There appears no serious quarrel on the point that the aforesaid matters were similar to the present one. Therefore. this Tribunal has no justifiable reason to take a different view. Similarly situated persons cannot be treated differently. This O.A. therefore, deserves to be and is accordingly allowed with an observation that the applicant is entitled to such retiral benefits as are admissible to Group-D employees on regular basis. Therefore. the respondents are directed that the pension and remaining retiral benefits pending, if an. including arrears, if an, admissible to the applicant may be considered and paid in accordance with the relevant rules and established practice along with an interest @ 8% per annum till the date of actual payment. No order as to costs. Writ Petition No.1413 of 2013 The issue in question is notres- integra. The law on this point has been settled and therefore, we do not find an illegality in the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. The writ petition is dismissed." 8. Accordingly, in view of the above, the O.As are allowed. There shall be not order as to costs. Copy of this order be placed in all the connected O.As.". ;