The court ruled that while pay fixation upon transfer adhered to rules, the applicants' prior promotions should be considered for financial upgradations under the MACP Scheme, as the denial was arbitrary.

ORDER

HON'BLE Ms.V.RAMA MATHEW, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

Briefly stated the facts are as under –

The applicants are presently working as Senior Assistant Loco Pilots in Level 4 of the Pay Matrix in the Palakkad Division of Southern Railway. They are aggrieved by the denial of consideration and grant of the 1^st financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme upon their joining the Palakkad Division of Southern Railway on transfer from South Western Railway resulting in substantial reduction in their pay. The applicants prior to their transfer and posting in Palakkad Division of Southern Railway were working in South Western Railway - the 1^st applicant in Mysore Division and 2^nd applicant in Hubli Division. The 1^st applicant commenced his service in Mysore Division on 12.06.2001 as Assistant Loco Pilot and upon grant of promotions was working as Loco Pilot (Mail) in Level 6 of the Pay Matrix at the time of his transfer to Palakkad Division by Office Order No.RNG/24/2020 dated 28.07.2020, produced as Annexure A-1. He was relieved on 19.08.2020 and joined Palakkad Division on 24.08.2020 but asked to come back after completion of period of 14 days quarantine and accordingly he reported again on 08.09.2020. As on the date of the relieve he was drawing a basic pay of Rs.76500/- in Level 6 of the Pay Matrix. The applicant’s posting was to the direct recruitment grade of Assistant Loco Pilot in Level 2 of the Pay Matrix ie., Rs.19990-63200. Upon the applicant’s posting as Assistant Loco Pilot his pay was fixed at the maximum of the Level 2 of the Pay Matrix, which is Rs.63200/- without protecting the difference in pay as personal pay as is required to be done and as has been done in the Trivandrum Division of the Southern Railway to identically situated persons. The Memorandum issued by the 3^rd respondent fixing the 1^st applicant’s pay is produced as Annexure A-2.

2. The 2^nd applicant commenced his service in the Hubli Division on 04.12.2000 as Assistant Loco Pilot and was transferred to Palakkad Division by order dated 26/27.03.2019. He was also working in Level 6 of the Pay Matrix at the time of his transfer, produced as Annexure A-3. He was relieved on 03.04.2019 and joined Palakkad Division on 05.04.2019. At the time of relieve from Hubli Division, the 2^nd applicant was drawing a basic pay of Rs.68000/- and in his case also the pay was fixed as Rs.63200/-, a true copy of the order fixing the pay is produced as Annexure A-4. In Annexure A-4 the 2^nd applicant’s pay was seen fixed as Rs.63200/- + Rs.2800/- personal pay. The applicant has represented against this order which is produced as Annexure A-5 dated 31.03.2021. Against this representation a corrigendum dated 22.04.2021 was issued wherein the personal pay was taken away and the pay was fixed at Rs.63200/-. This is produced as Annexure A-6. The Annexure A-7 representation dated 30.09.2021 was submitted by the applicant which has also been rejected by Annexure A-8.

3. Similarly the 1^st applicant also submitted a representation dated 27.10.2021 produced as Annexure A-9 which was rejected by Annexure A-10. In both Annexure A-8 and Annexure A-10 there is a reference to a Railway Board Order No.32/2017 dated 26.04.2017 which is produced as Annexure A-11. In terms of Annexure A-11 the pay of the Government servant under the circumstances and the present case of being transfer to a lower post will be fixed in the revised pay structure at the stage equal to the pay drawn by him/her in the higher level of the post held regularly. If no such stage is available the pay will be fixed at the stage next below in the lower level with respect to the pay drawn by him/her in the higher level of the post held regularly and the difference in the pay may be granted as personal pay to be absorbed in the future increment. If the maximum of the vertical range of pay progression at the lower level in which he/she is appointed, happens to be less than the pay drawn by him/her in the higher level, his pay/her pay may