Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 5575
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M.Swaminathan, J, Sangam Narain Srivastava, A
E.Janakiraman – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA/310/00328/2018|OA/310/00743/2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s S.T.Varadarajulu
For the Respondents: Mr.G.Dhamodaran, Mr.Su.Srinivasan
Pay fixation for Casual Labourers must comply with departmental orders, and Personal Pay may be used to address any drop in pay upon regularization, as per existing guidelines.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Pay fixation for Casual Labourers - Applicants sought relief to include increments earned during temporary status in their pay fixation upon regularization - Respondents denied benefits based on departmental orders and rules - Court found pay fixation followed prescribed guidelines and upheld the respondents' decisions. (Paras 1-10)
(B) Pay Protection - The principle that pay protection for Casual Labourers on regularization must be in accordance with existing departmental orders - Personal Pay may be granted to cover any drop in pay due to regularization. (Paras 6-9)
Facts of the case:
The applicants, former casual labourers, contested the denial of pay fixation benefits upon regularization, arguing that their previous increments should be included. They claimed that their pay was fixed lower than that of similarly situated employees.
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the pay fixation as per departmental rules and found no merit in the applicants' claims.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicants were entitled to have their previous increments included in their pay upon regularization.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the pay fixation was done according to the rules and that the applicants were not entitled to the benefits they sought, as the process adhered to the prescribed guidelines.
Result: OAs dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. relief sought under administrative tribunals act (Para 2) |
| 2. factual background of applicants' pay fixation (Para 3) |
| 3. respondents' defense against applicants' claims (Para 4) |
| 4. court's analysis on pay fixation and protection (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 5. dismissal of oas due to lack of merit (Para 10) |
ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr.Sangam Narain Srivastava, Member(A))
The applicants have filed the present OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:
“OA 328/2018
To call for the record pertaining to the order
1.GSO/3(50968)/2016-Admn/3487,
2.GSO/3(51030/2016-Admn/3488,
3.GSO/3(51015)/2016-Admn/3489 dated 24.11.2016,
4.GSO/3(51005)/2016-Admn/3502 dated 25.11.2016,
5.GSO/3(50965)/2017-Admn/2298 dated 10.08.2017 of the 4th respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to extend the benefit of pay fixation to the applicants, by including the increments earned while working as Casual Labourers (Temporary Status) as given to similarly placed Helpers A and thus render justice.
OA 743/2019
To call for the record pertaining to the order No.IGCAR/PF/6475/Admn.P.II./2016 dated 24.10.2016 of the 4th respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to extend the benefit of pay fixation to the applicants, by including the increments earned while working as Casual Labourers (Temporary Status) as given to similarly placed Helpers A and thus render justice”
2. Since the issue involved in both the OAs is similar which is founded on similar facts and circumstances and the relief prayed is same, these OAs are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
3. For the sake of brevity, OA 328/2018 is taken as a lead case and facts of the said case is narrated as under:
3.1 All the applicants are employees/retired employees of the 3rd respondent organisation. By an order dated 08.04.97 temporary status was granted to the applicants. Thereafter their services were regularised by the 3rd respondent and they were given the post of Helper - B. Their basic pay were fixed at Rs.2610/- in the time scale of pay of 2610-3540. Though their basic was 2780/- at the time of regularisation, their basic was fixed at lower level of scale of pay. The applicants sent representations on various dates to add already earned wages during temporary status in their basic pay.
3.2 While so, in terms of Department of Personnel& Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions order dated 09.05.2008, the 1st respondent issued an order dated 09.05.2008 to re fix the pay of the Casual Labourers on Temporary status by adding already earned increments and subsequently vide another order dated 14.05.2008 the Department reiterated their stand to include the increment earned during temporary status period and called for the details of order of refixation given to their employees. Based on the order while fixing basic pay of similarly placed Helper, the increment given while working as casual Labourer (Temporary status) was taken into consideration whereas the applicants were not given such benefit. Though the basic pay of the applicants were higher prior to their regularisation, after revision, their basic pay were reduced. Juniors were given higher basic pay and the applicants' were given lesser pay. The applicants sent representations and requested the respondents to consider their cases for benefits as given to other employees. As the respondents did not consider their cases, the applicants were constrained to move the Tribunal for relief in O.A.No.986 of 2015 and O.A.No.1209 of 2015. While the applications are pending before the Tribunal, the 1st respondent issued an OM dated 31.03.2016 and instructed the 2nd respondent to give pay protection for the CL-TS employees, where there is drop in pay as a result of fixation of pay earlier, in the form of Personnel pay to be absorbed in future increment.
3.3 The contention of the applicants is that believing the
