Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 12811
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
SURESH KUMAR BATRA, M (J), RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, M (A)
Kalyan Singh S/o Late Amar Chand, IDAS DCDA (Retd.) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through Secretary to Govt. Ministry of Defence – Respondent
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.1238/HP/2013 | O.A. No.1113/HR/2013
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sh. Jagdeep Jaswal
For the Respondents: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Sr. CGSC
Mandates of equality in pay scales must align with distinct duties and responsibilities set by recruitment rules and administrative guidelines, as established under the Administrative Tribunals Act.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Equal pay for equal work - Applicants sought STS pay scale benefits after their retirement, claiming discrimination under Article 14 and 16 against similarly placed employees. The court rejected the application highlighting distinct recruitment rules and duties applicable to promotees compared to direct recruits, affirming that compensation rules are administratively fixed by the government and must maintain parity across service categories. (Paras 2, 5, 18)
(B) Judicial Precedents - The reliance on previous case law was deemed inappropriate as factual distinctions were drawn, asserting that decisions must be contextual and not predictive across cases. Claims not supported by statute reject equitable resolution due to established recruitment protocols. (Paras 7, 17)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. common order addressing simultaneous applications. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. applicants were denied the sts pay scale due to reasons of distinct service structures. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. claims based on previous case laws were found inapplicable due to factual discrepancies. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. equal pay claims dismissed on the basis of distinct recruitment processes and job responsibilities. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 18) |
| 5. final ruling against the applicants endorses the legitimacy of established pay rules. (Para 13 , 16) |
ORDER
PER: MRS. RASHMI SAXENA SAHNI, MEMBER (A)
1. These two OAs have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order as facts and relief claimed therein are same. For convenience, facts are being taken from the case of Kalyan Singh & Ors. vs. UOI & Ors. (O.A.No.1238/HP/2013).
2. Present original application has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, seeking following relief:-
i) That both the Impugned orders dated 31.5.2013(A-1) denying the applicants benefit of STS pay scale in accordance with judgment passed by the Hon'ble Madras Bench and upheld by the Hon'ble Madras High Court be quashed and set aside being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
ii) That respondents be directed to grant the benefit of STS pay scale i.e. Rs. 10000-325-15200 (revised to PB-3 in the pay band of Rs. 15600-39100 with grade pay Rs. 6600/-) to the applicants w.e.f. the date they were promoted as ACDA's In the cadre of IDAS with further promotion as Junior Administrative Grade after five years service in STS grade with all consequential benefits of pay fixation, arrears of pay fixation with further benefits of revision of their retiral benefits from the date they have been retired from service.
iii) That respondent be further directed to grant the applicant Interest @ 12% p.a. on the amount calculated as per relief no. (ii) in as much as it is the respondent who have denied the aforesaid benefit to the applicant for such a long period and even after judgment passed by the Hon'ble Madras Bench and upheld by the Hon'ble Madras High Court same benefit has been denied to the applicants.
3. Facts of the case, as projected in the O.A. by the applicants are that applicants no. 1 to 8 and 10 are retired officers and have served respondent No.2 on various posts such as Auditors, Section Officer (Accounts), Assistant Accounts Officer, Accounts Officer, Sr. Account Officer and Assistant Controller of Defence Account (JTS), Dy. Controllers and Jt. Controllers of Defence Accounts. Applicant no. 9 is widow of Late Sh. R. R. Chauhan, DCDA and is claiming similar benefits as admissible to her as legal representative of Late Sh. R. R. Chauhan, who is similarly situated to applicants no.1 to 8.
4. Applicants were recruited as Auditors in Defence Accounts Departments. The promotion to the next post i.e. Section Officer (Accts) is based on qualifying the departmental SAS exam which is conducted on all India basis. Thereafter, the Section Officers are promoted as Asst. Accounts Officer. Further, promotion from AAO (Asstt. Accounts Officer) is to Accounts Officer and thereafter as Sr. Accounts Officer. The recruitment to ACDA (Asstt. Controller of Defence Accounts) in the cadre of IDAS is in Jr. Time Scale. The recruitment to ACDA is made partly from Group 'B' Officers i.e. Sr. Accounts Officers and partly by direct entry of I.D.A.S. through U.P.S.C. The Direct Recruits discharge their duties as ACDA I/C (Appendix-I to para 367 of office Manual Part-I) for a period of 2 to 3 years. Thereafter, they are promoted as Dy. Controller of Defence Accounts in the pay scale of 15600- 39100 with Grade Pay of Rs.6600/- in PB-3 (revised w.e.f. 01.01.2006) whereas the ACsDA in Jr. Time Scale of IDAS (Promotee officers) promoted from the post of Sr. Accounts Officer are placed in the pay scale of 15600-39100 with grade pay of Rs. 5400/-in PB-3 despite having pu
