Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, RAJESH KUMAR
Janardan Mohan Choudhary, aged about 65 Years, S/o Sri Anant Lal Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
Central Institute of Mining Fuel Research (CIMFR) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.
Prayer
1. The instant review petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking review/recall of the order dated 01.05.2023 passed in W.P.(S) No.5280 of 2018.
Facts
4. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the writ petition which also carried in the instant review petition, needs to be referred which reads as under:-
5. It is the case of the review petitioner/writ petitioner that the Central Fuel Research Institute, a unit of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, Dhanbad vide Advertisement No. 1/87 issued advertisement calling upon candidates for various posts including 1 post of Security Officer. It was stated in the said advertisement that the pay scale for the post of Security Officer would be Rs. 700-40-900-EB-40-1100-50-1300.
6. The review petitioner was duly selected for the said post of security officer and on perusal of the memo no.8/3110/88-E.I. dated 10th May, 1988, it appears that under reference of Office O.M No. 2- 23/86-PL(vii) dated 02/07th March, 1988, he was appointed on the post of Security Officer and has joined on 9 th May, 1988 on an initial salary of Rs. 2200-75-2800-E8-100-4000.
7. I
Eligibility for financial upgradation is contingent on fulfilling established educational qualifications; lacking such qualifications disallows claims for parity in benefits.
Non-functional replacement pay scale granted pre-MACP cannot be counted as financial upgradation against MACP benefits, per binding judicial precedent overriding administrative advice; ensures equali....
A person senior in a gradation list cannot be allowed to be paid lesser salary than his junior, as per the Supreme Court’s decision in Gurcharan Singh Grewal and another vs. Punjab State Electricity ....
Review jurisdiction is strictly limited to apparent errors in the record or new evidence; acceptance of a reduced pay scale upon appointment restricts subsequent claims for higher pay.
Financial upgradation under the Revised Assured Career Progression Scheme is warranted upon completion of 30 years of service, irrespective of subsequent promotions.
Review jurisdiction is limited to correcting errors apparent on the record and does not allow for re-examination of the merits of a case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that pay scale rationalization should be ignored for the purpose of the first financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme, based on the application ....
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
