IMPORTANT POINT
Pay fixation for re-employed ex-servicemen must protect total emoluments rather than individual pay components, ensuring no injustice occurs due to varying pay structures.

JUDGMENT :

N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR, J.

Heard Mr. K. R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. H.Buragohain, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner, by way of instituting the present proceeding, has prayed for a direction for fixation of his pay on his re-employment with the respondent Bank as an Armed Guard, by reckoning the pay he was so drawing prior to his retirement from the Army.

3. The petitioner herein, is an Ex-Army personnel, who had retired from the Army on 31.07.2009. Thereafter, the petitioner, applied for the post of Armed Guard with the respondent no. 1 Bank. On his selection for the said post, the respondent no. 1 Bank had vide communication dated 19.04.2014, offered appointment to the petitioner as a Probationary Armed Guard in the subordinate staff cadre of the Bank. In terms of the said communication dated 19.04.2014, the appointment of the petitioner was to be so effected in the scale of pay of Rs. 5850-11350/-, along with other allowances as may be applicable. The petitioner, on joining his services, was authorized a Basic pay of Rs. 6900/- along with Dearness Allowance of Rs. 6961.50/- and a Special Allowance of Rs. 240/-. Accordingly, the pay of the petitioner was so fixed at Rs. 14101.50/-.

4. The petitioner, on the date of his retirement from the Army was drawing a Basic pay of Rs. 8500/- along with a Grade pay of Rs. 2400/- and Dearness Allowance of Rs. 3483/-. Accordingly, the petitioner has contended that his pay was not so fixed, considering the basic pay and Grade pay as drawn by him, prior to his date of retirement from the Army. It was further contended that the Basic pay of the petitioner, on his joining services in pursuance to the said communication dated 19.04.2014 with the respondent no. 1 Bank, was fixed at a lower stage of Rs. 6900/-. Accordingly, the petitioner had instituted the present proceeding praying for a direction upon the respondent authorities to fix his Basic pay by reckoning the Basic pay and Grade pay so drawn by him, prior to his retirement in the Army.

5. Mr. K. R. Patgiri, learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the above facts and has contended the fact that the petitioner’s pay not having been fixed by reckoning the pay and Grade pay so drawn by him, prior to the date of his retirement from the Indian Army, the respondent no. 1 Bank is now required to refix his pay and other allowances by reckoning the pay and Grade pay so drawn by him, prior to the date of his retirement from the Indian Army.

6. Mr. H. Buragohain, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 Bank has submitted that the pay of personnel, re-employed after they having retired from the Armed forces, is so fixed in terms of a guidelines circulated by the Indian Bank’s Association vide a communication dated 30.01.2014. It is contended by Mr. H. Buragohain, learned counsel that the respondent no. 1 Bank had fixed the pay and allowances, strictly, in accordance with the said guidelines as circulated vide the said communication dated 30.01.2014 and the same would not call for any revision.

7. In support of his case, Mr. Buragohain, learned counsel has relied upon a decision of the Division Bench of this Court, in the case of The Regional Manager, State Bank of India & Ors., Vs Mrinal Kanti Biswas, Judgment and Order dated 23.02.2017 in WA No. 320/2015.

8. I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and also perused the materials available on record.

9. The issue arising in the present proceeding being the fixation of the pay and allowances of the petitioner, on his joining the respondent no. 1 Bank, after having retired from the Indian Army, in terms of his offer of appointment in the Bank on 19.04.2014, is required to be examined by this Court in terms of the Guidelines for Pay Fixation of Ex-Service