Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL, MR.JUSTICE K. V. JAYAKUMAR, JJ
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL ((a &&& E)), KERALA – Appellant
Versus
B.REMADEVI, RETIRED SUPERVISOR, OE ((bills)) – Respondent
Based on the provided legal document, the key legal principles are as follows:
Seniors are entitled to pay adjustment, known as "stepping up," to match their juniors' pay when an anomaly arises due to pay fixation schemes such as the ACP Scheme. This principle is well-established and has been reaffirmed through precedents (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The court emphasizes that all similarly situated employees must be treated equally to avoid violations of Article 14 of the Constitution, reinforcing the principle of equal pay for equal work (!) (!) .
When an anomaly occurs—specifically, when juniors receive higher pay than seniors due to upgradation schemes—the senior employee is entitled to have their pay stepped up to the level of the junior from the date the anomaly arose (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The principle applies irrespective of whether the upgradation was personal or scheme-based, provided that the anomaly is directly attributable to the upgradation scheme (!) (!) (!) (!) .
The court's approach is consistent with the broader legal doctrine that employees in similar circumstances should be treated alike, and any deviation resulting in pay disparities due to scheme benefits should be rectified to prevent discrimination (!) (!) (!) .
The court has upheld the authority of tribunals and courts to direct pay re-fixation and stepping up in cases where pay anomalies are identified, ensuring fairness and adherence to constitutional principles (!) (!) .
The legal stance is clear that pay fixation schemes like the ACP Scheme, which create anomalies, must be interpreted and applied in a manner that ensures senior employees are not prejudiced and are granted equitable pay adjustments (!) (!) (!) (!) .
In summary, the courts have consistently held that when pay anomalies due to upgradation or similar schemes occur, senior employees are entitled to have their pay stepped up to match that of their juniors, from the date the anomaly arose, to uphold principles of fairness and equality under the law.
JUDGMENT :
K. V. JAYAKUMAR, J.
The present OP(CAT) is directed against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.A.No.635/2016 dated 19.02.2021, whereby the following claim of the applicants were allowed.
"i) Call for the records leading up to Annexure A-16 and A-18 to A-22 and to quash the same.
ii) Direct the respondents to step up the pay of the applicants and equate the same to the pay drawn by their juniors Ms. P. sudha Devi, Ms. Shylamole Wilson Jacob, Ms. E. Lalithambal, Ms. Rollin Patricia and again Ms. P. Sudha Devi respectively with effect from 19.05.2003. 31.08.2005, 19.02.2003, 01.12.2000 and 19.05.2003 from which day respective juniors started getting higher pay.
(iii) Direct the respondent to refix the pension payable and other retirement benefits, on the basis of the refixation of the applicants pay as aforesaid"
2. The facts in brief necessary for disposal of this OP(CAT) is as follows:
The applicants (five in numbers) were appointed as Lower Division Clerks in the office of the petitioners on various dates. Thereafter, they were promoted as Upper Division Clerk (Accountant). Some of the juniors of the respondents/applicants were drawing a higher pay
Seniors are entitled to stepping up of pay to match juniors when an anomaly arises due to pay fixation schemes, as established by precedent.
The court emphasized that under the MACP Scheme, no stepping up of pay is admissible for a senior employee if a junior employee in the same grade has higher pay, and financial upgradation under the M....
Removal of pay anomaly by stepping-up pay scale of seniors is justified.
The principle that a senior employee cannot receive less pay than a junior is upheld, prompting the court to direct equal pay adjustments based on established seniority and promotion timelines.
Seniors are entitled to pay parity with juniors unless the junior's higher pay is due to advance increments or similar exceptions, which were not established in this case.
While Implementing scheme, difference in pay scales on account of grant of financial upgradation under old ACP Scheme (15.12.1998) under this scheme within same cadre shall not be construed as an ano....
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
