The tribunal reinforced the principle that a senior's pay should not be reduced to align with a junior's, maintaining the importance of fairness and equality in pay fixation.

ORDER

Being aggrieved with the order dated 30.07.2021 (Annex. A/1) issued by Sr. Accounts Officer, ZAO, CBDT, Jodhpur whereby terming the pay fixation order dated 20.10.2016 (Annex. A/6) issued pursuant to the order dated 18.10.2016 (Annex. A/5) passed by Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jodhpur stepping up the pay of the applicant at par with his junior, as incorrect and directed the DDO to recover a sum of Rs 4,69,644/- from the Gratuity dated 31.08.2021 (Annex. A/3), the applicant has preferred this OA and prayed to quash and set aside the above orders and direct the respondents to refix his pension as earlier and refund the amount recovered from the gratuity.

2. The facts necessary to adjudicate this OA are as under:-

2.1 The applicant was initially appointed to the post of Upper Divisional Clerk (UDC) in the Income Tax Department on 05.03.1983. The name of the applicant stood at serial number 170. Another employee named Nikhilesh Purohit (since retired) was also appointed to the post of UDC on 11.03.1983 and his name in the seniority list was at serial number 177. The applicant as well as Nikhilesh Purohit, both were promoted on the post of Income Tax Inspector on 25.06.2001. The name of Nikhilesh Purohit stood at serial number 234 whereas the name of the applicant stood at serial number 228 of the seniority list of Income Tax Inspector published by the Department. The applicant passed the departmental examination for Income Tax Officer (ITO) in the year 2000, whereas, Nikhilesh Purohit passed the above examination in the year 2008. The applicant was promoted on the post of ITO on 07.12.2009 whereas Nikhilesh Purohit was promoted on the above post on 11.02.2011. On promotion, the applicant got step up increments from the year 2000 whereas Nikhilesh Purohit granted the above increments from the year 2008 i.e. when he passed the examination.

2.2 The applicant retired on 31.08.2021. Prior to his retirement, the applicant got a letter dated 02.08.2021 (Annex. A/2) from the Drawing & Disbursing Officer (DDO), wherein, he was informed about the objection raised by Regional Accounts Office in his service book during verification to the effect that “Pay Fixation order issued by the Pr.CIT-2, Jodhpur vide letter No. 3096 dated 20.10.2016 is not correct, Revised pay fixation may be issued accordingly and recover amount as per fule and intimated to this office.” Vide this communication, the applicant was asked to give an explanation within 7 days.

2.3 It is the grievance of the applicant that the respondents have recovered a sum of Rs 4,69,644/- from the authority for gratuity dated 31.08.2021 (Annex. A/3) against the amount paid to the applicant on account of stepping up of his pay vide order dated 20.10.2016 (Annex. A/6). Vide pay pay-fixation order dated 20.10.2016, the applicant’s pay was stepped up w.e.f. 10.11.2008, i.e. the date from which the Nikhilesh Purohit started drawing the pay in Pay Band-II of Rs 16040 + Grade Pay Rs 4600/- per month on passing the departmental examination for the post of ITO. Vide impugned communication dated 02.08.2021 (Annex. A/2), the above pay fixation was found not correct and consequently, recovery was made from the gratuity granted vide authority dated 31.08.2021 to the applicant at the time of his retirement.

2.4 The pay re-fixation order after stepping up the pay of the applicant was made consequent to issuance of order dated 18.10.2016 (Annex. A/5) under FR 27 by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jodhpur. The applicant has assailed the refixation and consequent recovery on the ground that anomaly in the pay of the applicant was redressed by the respondent No. 2 in the year 2016. Thereafter, several audits have been conducted by the department but