SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Del) 343

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.
Rajesh Pant - Appellant
Vs.
Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal & Ors. - Respondent
W.P.(C) 7497 of 2012
Decided On : 12-07-2022

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Meet Malhotra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Diggaj Pathak, Mr. Ravi S.S. Chauhan, Ms. Pallak Singh, Ms. Shweta Sharma & Ms. Prachi Kohli, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Mr. Sharath Sampath, Mr. Ruchir Mishra, Mr. Sanjiv K. Saxena, Mr. Mukesh K. Tiwari & Mr. Ramneek Mishra, Advocates.

Headnote:

The petitioner, an Assistant at the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), sought pay band-2 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600, claiming parity with Assistants and Personal Assistants (PAs) of Central Secretariat Service (CSS) and Central Secretariat Stenographer Service (CSSS). The respondents denied the benefit, citing the petitioner's deputation basis appointment and the absence of direct recruitment through a competitive examination. The petitioner challenged this decision in the High Court.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an Assistant at the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT), sought pay band-2 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600, claiming parity with Assistants and Personal Assistants (PAs) of Central Secretariat Service (CSS) and Central Secretariat Stenographer Service (CSSS). The respondents denied the benefit, citing the petitioner's deputation basis appointment and the absence of direct recruitment through a competitive examination. The petitioner challenged this decision in the High Court.

Finding of the Court:

The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that there was no parity between the petitioner's position and that of his counterparts in the CSS and CSSS. The Court noted that the petitioner was appointed on deputation basis, while his counterparts were recruited through a competitive examination. The Court also found that the petitioner's duties and responsibilities were not identical to those of his counterparts in the CSS and CSSS.

Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to pay parity with Assistants and PAs of CSS and CSSS. 2. Whether the petitioner's deputation basis appointment and the absence of direct recruitment through a competitive examination were relevant factors in determining pay parity.

Ratio Decidendi: The High Court held that the petitioner was not entitled to pay parity with Assistants and PAs of CSS and CSSS. The Court found that there was no parity between the petitioner's position and that of his counterparts in the CSS and CSSS. The Court noted that the petitioner was appointed on deputation basis, while his counterparts were recruited through a competitive examination. The Court also found that the petitioner's duties and responsibilities were not identical to those of his counterparts in the CSS and CSSS.

Final Decision: The High Court dismissed the petition.

JUDGMENT :

Chandra Dhari Singh, J.

1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for issuance of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ to quash and set aside order dated 15th May 2012 and for directing the respondents to grant pay band-2 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600, with effect from, 8th August 2008, that is the date of promotion of the petitioner as an assistant.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The petitioner was relieved from his post of Upper Division Clerk (hereinafter “UDC”) at the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter “CAT”) (PB) New Delhi and joined the respondent no.1/Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter “TDSAT”) as UDC on deputation basis in the pay scale of Rs. 4000-6000 and was absorbed in the post on 31st May 2004. On 8th August 2008, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant which he currently holds, in the pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000.

3. On 11th September 2006, a proposal was initiated by the respondent no.3 for upgradation of the pay-scale of the Assistants and Personal Assistants (hereinafter “PAs”) of Central Secretariat Service (hereinafter “CSS”) and Central Secretariat Stenographer Service (hereinafter “CSSS”) from the scale of Rs. 5500-9000 to that of Rs. 6500-10500 in view of the desirability of parity with the pay-scale of Inspectors and other analogous posts in Central Board of Direct Taxes/Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBDT/CBEC). Thereafter, Sixth Central Pay Commission had recommended that the pre-revised scales of Rs. 5000-8000, Rs. 5500-9000, Rs. 6500-10500 be merged into a revised pay-band of Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4200 in pay band PB-II. The Department of Personnel and Training (hereinafter “DoPT”) further increased Grade Pay of Rs. 4200-4600 with respect to Stenographers Grade “C” working in CSSS and Assistants in CSS in terms of the Office Memorandum issued by the office of Department of Expenditure/respondent no.3 on 16th November 2009.

4. The DoPT issued two OMs. One was issued on 21st December 2009 granting the benefit of Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 to the Assistants of CSS. The second was issued on 23rd December 2009 granting the benefit of Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 to Stenographer Grade “C” (PA) in CSSS. These benefits were accorded w.e.f. 1st January 2006.

5. To claim the benefits, in pursuance of the proposal by the respondent no. 3 and the OMs issued by the DoPT, the Petitioner made a representation dated 7th May 2012 to respondent no. l seeking Pay Band-2 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600.

6. On 15th May 2012, respondent no.1 rejected the request for up-gradation of the pay scale from Rs. 5500-9000 to Rs. 6500-10500 and Grade Pay of Rs. 4600 of the petitioner, in light of the letter dated 18th July 2011 of DoPT that since, there has been no direct recruitment through Competitive Examination in the TDSAT to the post of Assistant and the posts are being filled on deputation basis, therefore, the Assistants of TDSAT are not at par with the Assistants of CSS and CSSS.

7. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the respondents denied him the benefit of increased Grade Pay from Rs. 4200 to Rs. 4600 which was accorded by the Respondent No. 3 to the Assistants and Stenographer Grade “C” of CSS/CSSS w.e.f 1st January 2006. Hence, the instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the setting aside of order dated 15th May 2012 and for directing the respondents to grant the upgraded pay-scale and Grade Pay.

SUBMISSIONS

8. Mr. Meet Malhotra, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the OM issued by the DoPT provided for up gradation of pay scale from Rs. 5500-9000 to Rs. 6500-10500 for Assistants of CSS and Stenographers Grade “C” (PA) of CSSS from 15th September, 2006. Thereafter, on 14th November, 2006, the DoPT issued an OM clarifying therein that the pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500, that is, Rs. 5500-9000 shall be applicable to Stenographer Grade “D” of CSSS and Upper D

                  Click Here to Read the rest of this document
                  1
                  2
                  3
                  4
                  5
                  6
                  7
                  8
                  9
                  10
                  11
                  SupremeToday Portrait Ad
                  supreme today icon
                  logo-black

                  An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

                  Please visit our Training & Support
                  Center or Contact Us for assistance

                  qr

                  Scan Me!

                  India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

                  For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

                  whatsapp-icon Back to top