Back
2026 Supreme(Gau) 594
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, CJ, ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY, J.
Union Of India Through Secretary, Ministry Of Textiles And Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Sri Gojen Taye And Anr. - Respondents
WP(C)/160 of 2024, WP(C)/225 of 2024
Decided On : 12-05-2026
For the Petitioner: Mr. B Chakravarty
For the Respondent: Mr M Chanda (For Caveator), MR S Choudhury (For Caveator)
In service jurisprudence, judicial discipline mandates that once an issue regarding pay parity has been authoritatively settled by a higher forum and attained finality, the same principle must be consistently applied to all similarly situated employees to ensure equality and avoid arbitrary treatment.
Headnote:(A) Service Law - Pay parity - Official Language cadre - Entitlement to revised grade pay - Employees in subordinate offices claiming parity with secretariat staff - Whether entitled to higher grade pay from the date of implementation of pay commission recommendations. (Paras 3, 7, 8, 9)
(B) Judicial Discipline - Binding precedent - Consistency in service jurisprudence - Once an issue regarding pay parity has been authoritatively settled by a higher forum and attained finality, the same must be applied to similarly situated employees to ensure equality. (Paras 22, 23)
(C) Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme - Financial upgradation - Consequential benefits - Once the feeder post grade pay is revised with retrospective effect, the consequential financial upgradations under the scheme are liable to be re-fixed accordingly. (Paras 11, 24)
Facts of the case:
Employees in the official language cadre sought placement in a higher grade pay effective from a specific date, following pay commission revisions. The lower tribunal allowed the claim based on existing office memoranda and judicial precedents. The employer challenged this, arguing against the applicability of the revised structure to subordinate offices.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the issue was already settled by a higher judicial forum, which had been affirmed by the apex court. It held that the tribunal correctly applied the law and that there was no legal infirmity in the direction to verify individual service particulars before releasing arrears.
Issues: Whether employees in the official language cadre of subordinate offices are entitled to a specific grade pay effective from the date of the pay commission's implementation and whether the consequential financial benefits under the career progression scheme should be re-fixed.
Ratio Decidendi: Judicial consistency is a facet of equality in service jurisprudence. When an issue of pay parity has been authoritatively settled by a higher forum and attained finality, it is binding upon the court to apply the same principle to similarly situated employees.
Result: Writ petitions dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. commencement of appellate proceedings and record review. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual foundation regarding pay revision and macps entitlement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. binding effect of established judicial precedents on service pay parity. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. requirement of judicial consistency and adherence to settled law. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. final appellate dismissal and directive for administrative compliance. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
ORDER :
A.D. Choudhury, J.
1. Heard Mr. B Chakravarty, learned counsel for the petitioners. We have also heard Mrs. U Dutta, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. We have also perused the materials available on record, including the Common Judgment and Order dated 06.06.2023 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench in OA No. 286/2019 and OA No. 238/2020.
3. The core issue arising for consideration in the present writ petition is whether the petitioners belonging to the official language cadre under the Central Silk Board (CSB) are entitled to placement in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- with effect from 01.01.2006 and the consequential financial upgradations under the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS).
4. The learned Tribunal, upon consideration of the relevant office memoranda issued by the Government of India and the precedents governing the field, answered the issue in favour of the petitioners and directed extension of consequential benefits.
5. The correctness of the said determination is under challenge before us.
6. The factual foundation on which the claims are raised is substantially undisputed.
7. Pursuant to the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission, the Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, issued Office Memorandum dated 24.11.2008, followed by a Corrigendum dated 27.11.2008, revising the pay structure of the Official Language Cadre belonging to the Central Secretariat Official Language Service (CSOLS) with effect from 01.01.2006.
8. Under the revised structure, Junior Translator carried a Grade Pay of Rs.4200/-, Senior Translator a Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/-, Assistant Director (Official Language) a Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- and Deputy Director (Official Language) a Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/-.
9. The learned Tribunal noticed that the aforesaid revised structure was thereafter extended to similarly designated Official Language posts in subordinate offices by Communication dated 20.09.2010 and 13.10.2010, whereby Senior Translator (Hindi) was placed in Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- in Pay Band 2 of Rs. 9300-34800/- and Junior Translator (Hindi) in Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/- with effect from 01.01.2006.
10.Equally relevant is the Office Memorandum dated 19.05.2009 introducing the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS), which grants financial upgradation on completion of 10, 20, and 30 years of continuous service.
11.The petitioners contended that once the feeder post itself was revised with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- with effect from 01-01-2006, the consequential MACPS benefits were also liable to be re-fixed accordingly.
12.What assumes significance is that the controversy was not res integra before the learned Tribunal.
13.The precise issue had earlier fallen for consideration before the Full Bench of the Ernakulum Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 953/2012 and the connected O.A. No. 656/2012, decided on 14.10.2013. The issue framed therein was whether Junior Hindi Translators in subordinate offices of the Central Government were entitled to Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- from 01.01.2006 on the basis of the Office Memorandum dated 13.11.2009.
14.The Full Bench answered the issue affirmatively and held that such employees were entitled to the revised Grade Pay from 01.01.2006. The said Full Bench decision was carried in challenge before the High Court of Kerala in O.P. (CAT) No. 142/2014.
15.The Kerala High Court, by a Judgment dated 01.04.2015, dismissed the challen
