HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
Sanjib Banerjee, W. Diengdoh, J.
Union of India & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Balbir Singh Yadav - Respondent
WA No. 18/2019 with MC (WA) No. 36/2019
Decided On : 05-09-2022
Clerical Posts - Assam Rifles - [Assam Rifles Act, 2006, Section 12(1)(a); Central Armed Police Forces (Assistant Sub-Inspector (Warrant Officer) Rank) Recruitment Rules, 1986, Rule 3] - The court discussed the judgment and order of the Gauhati High Court, which directed parity in rank structure and pay of the Assam Rifles clerical cadre with other Central Armed Police Forces. The court also considered the re-mustering of the writ petitioner from the clerical cadre to the general cadre and the subsequent denial of benefits based on this re-mustering.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner, initially inducted into Assam Rifles as a clerk, was re-mustered to the general cadre after failing an examination. The petitioner sought additional benefits granted to clerical staff in Assam Rifles, claiming unfair treatment compared to others who had served for shorter durations in the clerical posts.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the writ petitioner, after being re-mustered to the general cadre, was not entitled to the benefits granted to clerical staff in Assam Rifles. The court set aside the judgment and order of December 21, 2018 and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: The main issue was whether the writ petitioner, after being re-mustered to the general cadre, was entitled to the benefits granted to clerical staff in Assam Rifles.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the writ petitioner, having been re-mustered to the general cadre, was not entitled to the benefits granted to clerical staff in Assam Rifles, as the petitioner ceased to be in a clerical position after the re-mustering.
Final Decision: The judgment and order of December 21, 2018 were set aside, and the writ petition was dismissed. The appeal succeeded, and there was no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT
Sanjib Banerjee, CJ. - The appeal is directed against an order of December 21, 2018 by which the respondent's writ petition was allowed and certain benefits conferred on the respondent that the appellant asserts that the respondent was not entitled to.
2. It appears that persons occupying clerical posts in the Assam Rifles were paid less than similarly positioned persons in the other Central Armed Police Forces. As a result, persons occupying clerical posts in Assam Rifles petitioned to this Court for the anomaly to be removed. By a judgment and order of the Gauhati High Court (from which this Court was carved out in 2013) the petition was allowed on August 23, 2012. The operative part of the order dated August 23, 2012 provided as follows:
'14. In the result, this writ petition stands disposed of with the direction to the respondent No.2, the Director General of Assam Rifles to take up the matter again with the respondent No. 1, i.e. the Secretary to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs to bring parity in respect of rank structure and pay of the Assam Rifles clerical cadre at par with other CPOs by introducing rank of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Warrant Officer) at the entry grade w.e.f. 1.1.1986 in the scale of pay of Rs.1320-2040 (revised Rs.4000-6000) w.e.f. 1.1.1996 or any other date as the authority or any other date as the authority deem it fit and proper with all consequential service benefits in the light of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance resolution dated 20.9.1997 communicated through MHA letter bearing No.2701-02/1/97 PC Cell/Pef-1 dated 10.10.1997. The whole exercise would be completed within a period of 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and order.'
3. There is no dispute that the judgment was upheld in appeal by an order of April 30, 2013. Special leave petitions carried from the appellate order were taken up by the Supreme Court and the resultant appeals dismissed by an order of November 17, 2015. Thus, clerical staff in Assam Rifles became entitled to the same pay and benefits as persons in clerical posts in the other Central Armed Police Forces.
4. The writ petitioner in the present case sought to use the order granting additional benefits to persons occupying clerical posts in Assam Rifles only by virtue of the fact that the writ petitioner was initially inducted into Assam Rifles in or about 1987 as a clerk in the Duty Company of Assam Rifles Training Centre and School.
5. However, it is the admitted position, as will appear from paragraphs 3 and 4 of the writ petition, that the writ petitioner was unsuccessful in the examination conducted at the end of the initial training period and, as a consequence, the writ petitioner was re-mustered in the general cadre. It is necessary to notice what has been pleaded in such regard at paragraphs 3 and 4 of the writ petition:
'3. ... The consequence being that the petitioner was unsuccessful in the said written/typing examination.
'4. That the petitioner states that thereafter, the petitioner was ordered to undergo basic training of Riflemen (General Duty) on this very ground that he was unsuccessful in the written exam and his trade was re-mustered from Lnk (Writer) to Rifleman (General Duty)...'
6. There is, no doubt, that a grievance is expressed in the petition that the writ petitioner was virtually demoted to the post of Rifleman (General Duty). However, the perceived demotion appears to have been in the light of the writ petitioner failing to pass the examination for retaining his position in the clerical cadre. At any rate, the perceived demotion was in or about the year 1988. The writ petitioner accepted the alleged demotion, continued to discharge the duties of the post that was assigned to him and obtained the benefits and perquisites of the post, including several promotions over a period of more than 20 years.
7. Upon the persons in the clerical posts in Assam Rifles obtaining substantial benefit b
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a petitioner, after being re-mustered from a clerical position to a general cadre, is not entitled to the benefits granted to clerical staff i....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the principle of equal pay for equal work, emphasizing that there should be no distinction in pay-scales for employees with similar duties and r....
Equity in pay structure mandates the implementation of rank parity for clerical positions in the Assam Rifles as previously adjudicated by higher courts.
The principle of res judicata and issue estoppel applies when a particular employer has suffered an adverse judgment on an issue, and the court is bound by previous orders that have attained finality....
The denial of equal pay and benefits to similarly situated personnel violates constitutional principles of equality, reaffirming the established parity in ranks between different roles in similar pos....
The denial of benefits to the petitioners was discriminatory and arbitrary, violating Articles 14 and 16 of The Constitution of India, and the terms and conditions of service applicable at the time o....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.