The court affirmed that government employees are entitled to Grade Pay based on accumulated service years, consistent with prior judicial decisions, despite classifications of functional and non-functional roles.

ORDER :

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.

The present petition has been filed by the Union of India represented by the Central Public Works Department and its functionaries challenging the order dated 24.09.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench, Bengaluru in Original Application No.170/00461/2023, whereby the Tribunal has allowed the OA filed by the respondent by stating as under:

“10. From the aforesaid rulings it is clear that the stance of the respondents - Union of India and others, that non-functional Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- would not be granted to such of those officers who had got Rs.5400/- on upgradation under ACP scheme was negated by the Hon'ble Courts. In such circumstances, the respondents denying the claim of the applicant on the same ground is unjustifiable. Accordingly, the matter calls for interference by this Tribunal. Hence we pass the following:

ORDER

1) The impugned orders dated 14/15.05.2023 (Annexure A4) and 16.08.2023 (Annexure A8) issued by the Respondent No.4 are set aside.

2) The respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant for grant of Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- from 09.03.2023 in terms of the order passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in M.Subramaniam's case supra and pass an appropriate order in an expedite manner, in any event not later than 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order.

3) OA stands disposed of in terms of above. No order as to costs.”

2. The respondent had approached the Tribunal challenging the orders dated 14/15.05.2023 issued by petitioner No.4. A reading of the aforesaid order would reveal that, the request of the respondent for granting him the grade pay of Rs.5,400/- with effect from 25.03.2017 after completion of four years of regular service in the grade pay of Rs.4,800/- was denied and further, representation made by him was rejected.

3. The respondent was initially appointed as Steno Grade III w.e.f. 09.03.1989. He was promoted to Grade II Steno from 20.08.2003 and Grade I from 25.03.2013, which was in the pay scale of Rs.7500- 34800, which is in Group-B. There is no dispute, the respondent who was working as a Private Secretary on being promoted to the said post for the vacancy year 2020 in terms of the Office Order dated 11.11.2022, his pay was fixed in the PB-2, Rs.9300-34800 with grade pay of Rs.4,600/-. He was granted the 3^rd financial upgradation under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) w.e.f. 09.03.2019, whereby he was granted the grade pay of Rs.4,800/-. His case was that, on completion of four years regular service in the grade pay of Rs.4,800/-, he has become eligible for grade pay of Rs.5,400/- in accordance with Finance Ministry resolution dated 29.08.2008. The same having been rejected, resulted in the filing of the OA before the Tribunal. The respondent had relied upon the order of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Ors. -Vs.- M. Subramaniam [Civil Appeal No.8883/2011, decided on 10.10.2017 and Review Petition (Civil) No.2512/2018, decided on 25.08.2018], wherein, identical relief was granted in accordance with Finance Ministry resolution dated 29.08.2008. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Union of India and Ors. -Vs.- Arabinda Pathak and Ors. [WPCT No.85/2021, decided on 22.02.2022]. The case of the petitioners before the Tribunal was that, the respondent is holding a functional post carrying grade pay of Rs.4,600/-, but he was placed in the grade pay of Rs.4,800/- in PB-2 (non-functional basis) by virtue of 3^rd financial upgradation w.e.f. 09.03.2019 under MACPS. So in that sense, the respondent has not hel