Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 11347
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M. Swaminathan, J, Sangam Narain Srivastava, A
Hemalatha Ramalingam – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA/310/00352 | OA/310/00353 | OA/310/00354/2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sabu M. Philip
For the Respondents: Mr. V. Radhakrishnan Senior Counsel for Mr. A. Abdul Ajees
The judgment reinforces that equal pay cannot be automatically extended across departments due to differing responsibilities, recruitment processes, and job evaluation dynamics.
Headnote:(A) Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 - Pay scales of Junior and Senior Translators - Disparities in pay scales of Railway staff against other ministries - Opened up legal proceedings by aggrieved retired Senior Translators seeking pay scale equalization and implementation of prior Tribunal orders - Court examined if equal pay for equal work principle applies in varying recruitment processes - Evidence demonstrated that recruitment processes and responsibilities for similar positions differ significantly between the Railways and other ministries resulting in the rejection of the claim. (Paras 3, 11, 15, 17-18)
(B) Equal Pay for Equal Work - Nature of duties and recruitment criteria distinguished for differing government departments impacting pay parity grievances - Court upheld position stating that gains from recommendations applicable to field and Secretariat offices can differ based on functional assessments and hierarchy - Mechanism of evaluating post equivalence and pay scales left to specialized bodies. (Paras 12, 15, 21)
Facts of the case:
The applicants, retired Senior Translators, claimed pay equalization with counterparts in other ministries, asserting that previous Tribunal orders for pay adjustments were ignored by the Railway authorities. They detailed discrepancies in pay scales post-Central Pay Commission recommendations since 1996, highlighting numerous failed representations.
Findings of Court:
The court determined that the restructuring efforts for pay equality had not been uniformly implemented across government sectors due to differences in the recruitment process and assignment of duties, thus justifying the denials of the applicants’ claims.
Issues: The determination of eligibility for pay scale adjustments versus discrepancies in their recruitment and responsibilities compared to counterparts in offices closely aligned with the Official Languages Policy.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that comparative evaluations of responsibilities reflect the need for differentiated recruitment and corresponding pay structures for staff between departments, thus rendering the applicants’ claims unsubstantiated due to the nature of their assignments and past orders lacking universal applicability.
Result: All the OAs are dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the applicants' request for pay equalization. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. detailed arguments regarding discrepancies in pay scales. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. judicial evaluation of pay scale equivalence. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 4. rebuttal of claims with respect to existing rulings. (Para 17) |
| 5. final decision and rationale for dismissal. (Para 18) |
ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member)
Since the issue involved in all the three Original Applications is similar which is founded on similar facts and circumstances of the case, these applications were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. The applicants are seeking the following relief:
“To call for the records from the respondents in respect of the applicants and to declare that the applicants are eligible to be granted upgraded pay scales for Junior Translators of Rs.5000-8000, w.e.f. 01.01.1996, 5500-9000, w.e.f. 11.02.2003 with notional fixation w.e.f.01.01.1996 Rs.4600 GP w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and level 7 w.e.f. 01.01.2016 and for Senior Translators Rs.5500-9000 w.e.f. 01.01.1996, 6500-10500, w.e.f. 11.02.2003 with notional fixation w.e.f. 01.01.1996 Rs.4800 GP w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and level 8 w.e.f. 01.01.2016 with up to date arrears and interest at the rate of 10% and consequential MACP benefits as applicable to the applicants treating them as direct recruits and to issue such other orders or direction as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case and award the cost the proceedings”.
3. Brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicants are as follows:
The applicants in this case are retired Senior Translators who served in various divisions of the Southern Railway. They initially entered government service in different categories but were later selected and appointed as Junior Translators, formerly designated as Hindi Assistants or Brajbhasha Assistants. Up to the implementation of the 4th Central Pay Commission, their pay scales were at par with those of Translators working in other Ministries and Departments of the Government of India. However, with effect from 01.01.1996, disparities began to emerge, and the applicants were placed in lower pay scales compared to their counterparts in other government sectors. Despite this disparity, the applicants and their associations have made numerous representations to the authorities, highlighting the unjust treatment and seeking parity in pay. Additionally, they had previously approached the Ernakulam Bench of this Tribunal in OA No. 485/2007. Although the Tribunal passed an order in July 2009, the same has not been acted upon or considered by the concerned Railway authorities. The applicants are further aggrieved by the fact that their repeated representations have not received any response or acknowledgement from the respondents. This continued inaction and neglect have compelled the applicants to once again seek legal recourse by approaching this Tribunal through the present Original Application seeking appropriate relief and justice regarding the pay scale anomalies and non- implementation of prior orders.
4. The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants were recruited by the Railway Recruitment Board/Department Selection committee as Rajbhasha Assistant (Now Jr. Translators) in the pay scale equivalent to the Translators of other ministries/subordinate offices. The educational qualification required for this post was also the same as other Ministries. He drew our attention to the pay scale of each office as on 01.01.1996:
| Department | Jr Hindi Translator | Sr Hindi Translator | Asst Director (OL |
| CSOLS | 5500-9000 | 6500-10500 | 7500-12000 |
| 5000-8000 | 5500-9000 | 6500-10500 | |
| Railways | 4500-7000 Rajbhasha Asst Gr-1 | 5000-8000 Rajbhasha Asst Gr- 1I | 6500-10500 Rajbhasha Superintendent |
5. The learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that the 5th Pay Commission had recommended upgrading the pay scale of Rs.1400–2300 t
