Judgment

Nanavati, J.-Delay condoned.

2. Special leave granted.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. The only question which arises for consideration in these appeals is whether the Central Administrative Tribunal was right in allowing the application of the respondents directing the appellants to step up their pay so as to make it at par with the pay of B.C. Mishra who was their junior but getting a higher pay.

5. It is held by the Tribunal that the respondents and Mishra belonged to the same cadre and their pay scales were also the same in the lower posts and, therefore, they are entitled to the benefit of stepping up. But, what the Tribunal has failed to take into consideration is the Circular dated 4.11.1993 issued by the Government of India, Department of Personnel and Training which clearly provides that the anomaly for granting benefit of stepping up of pay should be directly as a result of the application of fundamental rule 22-C and that if a junior officer draws a higher pay in the lower post either because of ad­vance increments or on any other account then the provision of step­ping up would not apply in such a case. Moreover in paragraph 2(c) of the Circula