The imposition of a censure penalty after retirement is invalid, and claims barred by res judicata and limitation cannot be revisited in subsequent applications.

ORDER 

PER: HON’BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

1. The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:

“…..to call for the records pertaining to

1. Memo No.Admn.VC-1/99/58, dated 22.12.1999 (Annexure-IV)

2. Memo No.Admn.VC-1/99/58, dated 06.04.2005 (Annexure-VII)

3. Memo No.Admn.A/A5/2000/281, dated 05.05.2011 (Annexure- XXII)

and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the rules and instructions prescribed and in violation of the provisions of the constitution contained in Articles 14, 16 and 21 and set-aside and quash the said illegal orders with consequential direction to the Respondents to grant second higher scale of pay of Rs.14300-400- 18300/- w.e.f. 19.07.2002 with all consequential benefits and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.”

2. Facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, are summarised below:

i. The applicant was 72 years old when this OA was filed. The impugned orders are dt.22.12.1999 (Charge Memo), dt.06.04.2005 (Order of penalty/Censure) & dt. 05.05.2011 (Rejection of request for higher scale under CAS).

ii. The applicant has challenged the order No.Admn.VC-1/99/58, dated 06.04.2005 (Annexure-VII), issued on the basis of the charge memo No.Admn.VC-1/99/58, dated 22.12.1999 (Annexure-IV), allegedly without supplying a copy of the report of the Inquiry Officer. He has also challenged the order No. Admn.A/A5/2000/281, dated 05.05.2011 (Annexure-XXII), denying him higher scale of pay.

iii. The applicant states that he was granted higher scale of pay, Rs.3700- 5700/-, w.e.f. 19.07.1995. The next higher scale of pay of Rs.14300- 400-18300/- (revised scale), due w.e.f. 19.07.2002, was denied, in spite of his request through several representations.

iv. It is submitted that the applicant was appointed as Senior Audio Visual Officer in the faculty of Library and Documentation Services, at the NIRD, on a pay of Rs.1100/- per month, in the scale of Rs.1100-50-1600/-, on 27.12.1982 forenoon.

v. The post of Senior Audio Visual Officer is an isolated post, without any defined promotional avenues. After completing 13 years of unblemished service, the Executive Council granted higher pay in the scale of Rs.3700-5700 (pre-revised), as purely personal to the applicant, without any change in the group, status, nature of duties and responsibilities, w.e.f. 19.07.1995, on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), vide memo No.Admn.B/B5/95/143, dated 01.08.1995.

vi. The NIRD, in order to reduce stagnation and to provide promotional prospects, formulated and implemented Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) for the academic staff and also the non-academic Group-C & D staff, vide OM, dated 23.09.1999. According to this Scheme, the non- Academic Groups-A & B officer, who were directly recruited, may be granted the next higher scale, on completion of 8 years of service, and the 2nd higher scale on completion of 7 years of service, subject to the condition of “No promotion during the said period”. The grant of higher scale is further subject to scrutiny and recommendation by the DPC and approval of the appointing authority concerned.

vii. The applicant argues that he was eligible for the 2nd higher scale “Financial Upgradation”, after completion of 15 years of service, as per the scheme, w.e.f. 27.12.1987. However, the NIRD has counted the service of the applicant for the 2nd Financial Upgradation from the date of granting the 1st Financial Upgradation (i.e. 19/07/1995), which is not correct. In th