Back
2024 Supreme(Del) 235
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rekha Palli, Rajnish Bhatnagar, JJ.
Central Council For Research In Homoeopathy Through Its Director General & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Amit Kumar Sharma & Anr. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 2286 of 2024
Decided On : 16-02-2024
Mr. Sunil Narula and Ms. Isha Thakur, Advocates, for the Petitioners.
Ms. Aanchal Anand, Advocate, for the Respondents.
IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the by-laws of an autonomous organization, which provide for the parity of pay scales and allowances with the Central Government employees, are binding on the organization, and the organization cannot seek prior approval from the Ministry of Finance and Expenditure for such parity.
Headnote:
Autonomous Organisation - Pay Scale Dispute - [Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India] - [44, 47] - The court discussed the relevant provisions of the by-laws of the petitioner organization, which clearly provided that the pay scale and allowances of its employees would be at par with the pay scale of the Central Government employees. The court highlighted that the petitioner cannot be permitted to urge that it must take prior approval from the Ministry of Finance and Expenditure, as the by-laws themselves clarify the applicability of the Central Government pay scale to the petitioner's employees. The court also emphasized that the decision in Bhagwan & Ors. (supra) was not applicable to the present case, as the by-laws of the petitioner organization, by which it is bound, provided for the parity of pay scales and allowances with the Central Government employees.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petition sought to challenge an order directing the petitioners to grant appropriate pay scale and grade pay to the respondents, who were employees of an autonomous organization, at par with the employees of the Central Government.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned order was based on the relevant provisions of the by-laws of the petitioner organization, which clearly provided for the parity of pay scales and allowances with the Central Government employees. The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing that the petitioner cannot be permitted to urge that it must take prior approval from the Ministry of Finance and Expenditure, as the by-laws themselves clarify the applicability of the Central Government pay scale to the petitioner's employees.
Issues: The main issue was whether the employees of the autonomous organization were entitled to the same pay scale and allowances as the employees of the Central Government, and whether the petitioner was required to obtain specific approval from the Ministry of Finance and Expenditure for such parity.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the by-laws of the petitioner organization, by which it is bound, provided for the parity of pay scales and allowances with the Central Government employees, and therefore, the petitioner cannot be permitted to urge that it must take prior approval from the Ministry of Finance and Expenditure. The court also emphasized that the decision in Bhagwan & Ors. (supra) was not applicable to the present case, as the by-laws of the petitioner organization clearly provided for the parity of pay scales and allowances with the Central Government employees.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was granted eight weeks' time to implement the impugned order.
JUDGMENT
Rekha Palli, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 9517/2024 -Ex.
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 2286/2024
3. The present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeks to assail the order dated 24.04.2023 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 1213/2019. Vide the impugned order, the learned Tribunal has allowed the original application filed by the respondents and has consequently directed the petitioners to grant them appropriate pay scale alongwith the Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- as is being paid to employees of the Central Government holding identical posts.
4. In support of the petition, Mr. Sunil Narula, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the impugned order is wholly perverse as the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the petitioner/Central Council for Research in Homeopathy(CCRH) is an Autonomous Organisation and therefore the service conditions of its employees is different from employees working under the Central Government. He submits that respondents, being employees of autonomous organization, which is governed by its own Memorandum of Association, Rules and By-laws, cannot seek the pay scales granted to similarly situated employees working under the Central Government. In support of his plea, he seeks to place reliance on a decision of the Apex Court in The State of Maharashtra & Anr. vs. Bhagwan & Ors. in Civil Appeal Nos. 7682-7684 of 2021.
5. He further submits that any decision to enhance the pay scale of the respondents to bring it at par with the Central Government employees can be taken by the petitioners after obtaining specific approval from the Ministry of Finance and Expenditure. As the respondents' representation in this regard, which was duly forwarded to the Ministry of Finance and Expenditure, already stands rejected, they cannot be granted parity of pay with the Central Government employees. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed and the impugned order be set aside.
6. On the other hand, Ms. Aanchal Anand, learned counsel for the respondents, who appears on advance notice, supports the impugned order and submits that once the By-laws of the petitioner itself provide that the payscales and allowances payable to employees of the CCRH would be same as that payable to similar employees of the Central Government, the petitioners cannot now be permitted to urge that approval from the Ministry of Finance and Expenditure was required for stepping up the pay of the respondents to bring it at par with the Central Government employees. She further submits that respondents are being discriminated against as Doctors, Nurses and Pharmacists working in the petitioner organisation are receiving the same payscale as is being paid to employees of the Central Government. She, therefore, prays that the writ petition be dismissed.
7. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, we may begin by noting hereinbelow the relevant extracts of the impugned order.
"6. On the face of it, the impugned order is a very terse and cryptic order which merely mentions that the issue was referred to the concerned ministry who have advised that the applicants cannot claim equity with the employees of Central Government Hospitals as they are employees of an autonomous organisation and not Central Govt. Factually, this statement is correct but at the same time the by-laws of the organisation are also unambiguous. Learned counsel has pointed out towards paras 44 and 47 of the said by-laws to substantiate the case of the applicants. These two by-laws read as under:
Scale of Pay of Posts
"44. The scales of pay and allowances applicable to the officers and establishments in the services of the Central Council shall be those prescribed by the Government of India for similar personnel employed under them.
47. In respect of matters not provided for in these
