Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ANIL KSHETARPAL, AMIT MAHAJAN
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Shubham Pandey – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the petition (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondents' request for pay protection (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. arguments by petitioner against pay protection (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's interpretation of pay protection (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. conclusion and order of the court (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
JUDGMENT :
AMIT MAHAJAN, J.
1. The present petition has been field assailing the order dated 25.02.2025, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter ‘CAT’) in O.A. No. 1804/2023 whereby the Petitioner was directed to re-fix the basic of the Respondents by allowing the benefit of pay protection of the pay drawn by the them along with consequential benefits.
2. The quintessential facets governing the present dispute are that the Respondents are Direct Recruit Officers of the Military Engineer Services (‘MSE’) of different Batches, 18 of them are from Indian Defense Service of Engineers (‘IDSE’ Cadre and the other 3 belong to Quantity Surveying and Contracts (‘QS&C’) Cadre, recruited between 2003 to 2019, as Assistant Executive Engineers (‘AEE’) through the All India Engineering Services Examination by the Union Public Servi
The court affirmed that pay protection benefits must be granted to direct recruits from PSUs regardless of recruitment through competitive examinations, rejecting arbitrary restrictions on eligibilit....
Distinction in pay protection between interview and open competitive examination selections is arbitrary, lacking intelligible differentia, violating Articles 14 and 16; employees from government ser....
The court upheld the Central Administrative Tribunal's decision granting pay protection, emphasizing adherence to established legal precedents and rejecting arbitrary distinctions in pay protection e....
The judgment established that the distinction for according pay protection based on the manner of recruitment was arbitrary and unfair, and the Office Memorandum removing the distinction was acknowle....
The main legal point established is that the DOP&T OM dated 07.08.1989 aims to protect the 'basic salary' plus 'dearness allowance' of candidates recruited from Public Sector Undertakings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prescribed scale of pay in the recruitment notification for direct recruitment to government schools prevails over claims for pay protecti....
Employees appointed before NPS implementation are entitled to Old Pension Scheme benefits.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
