CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH Chandigarh, the 25 t h day of November, 2025 CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J)

HON’BLE MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, MEMBER (A)

Achhar Pal Kaushal son of Late Sh. Karam Chand a ged 6 7 y ears, Superintendent (Retd.), aged 72 years, House N o. 1 489, P ushpac Complex, Sector 49-B, Chandigarh-160047 (Group 'B')

...Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Harish Chandra)

VERSUS

1. Union of India through the Secretary, Government o f I ndia, M inistry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi-110001.

2. The Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of F inance, D epartment of Expenditure, New Delhi-110001

3. Chief Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise Zone, C .R. B uilding, P lot No. 19, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh-160017.

4. The P rincipal Chief Commissioner, Central Goods & S ervices T ax a nd Central Excise Commissionerate, Revenue B uilding, S ector-17, Chandigarh-160017 …Respondents (By Advocate: Ms. Swati Arora)

O R D E R

Per: RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J):

1. The present Original Application filed u/s 19 o f t he A dministrative Tribunals Act is directed against O.M. dated 21.04.2004 ( Annexure A -1) issued by Respondent No. 2 revising the pay scales o f t he p osts o f C BEC under D epartment of Revenue w.e.f. 21.04.2004 instead o f 0 1.01.1996.

2025.12.18 Applicant has prayed for relief as under:

“i).That Annexure A-1 dated 21.04.2004 to the e xtent i t g rants

upgraded Pay Scale w.e.f. 21.04.2004 be quashed and set aside.

iii) That the respondents be directed to extend the benefit o f J udgments A-2, A-3 and A-5 to the applicant and to grant him u pgraded P ay S cale w.e.f. 01.01.1996 on actual basis when the recommendations o f 5 th CPC became operational.

iv) That the respondents be further directed to allow t he a pplicant t o have the benefit of 'option' for fixation purpose under F.R. 22(1)(a).

v) That the respondents be further directed to grant t he d ifference i n pay and allowances w.e.f. 01.01.1996 as I nspector and a s Superintendent w.e.f. 29.8.1997 till the date of actual p ayment w ith interest thereon at the rate of 12% per annum.

vi) That the applicant be held entitled to revised p ensionary b enefits from due dates along with interest.

vii) This Hon'ble Tribunal may also pass any other order f or t he g rant o f relief to the applicant which it may deem fit in the p eculiar f acts a nd circumstances of the case.

viii) That the cost of the application may also be awarded i n f avour o f the applicants. ”

2. Factual matrix of the case is as follows. The a pplicant w as i nitially appointed as LDC on 13.09.1974. He was promoted a s U DC i n 1 976. H e came to be promoted as Inspector on 13.03.1981 i n t he r evised p ay scale of Rs. 1640-2900 and was promoted as S uperintendent o n 29.08.1997 in the p ay scale of Rs. 7500-12000 i n t he r espondent department.

3. Prior to the 5 t h Central P ay Commission (CPC), t he I nspectors a nd Superintendents working in the respondent department w ere g ranted the pay scales of Rs. 1640-2900/- and Rs. 2000-3500/- r espectively. The 5 t h CPC recommended the pay scale of Rs. 5 500-9000/- a nd R s. 6500-10500/- for Inspectors and Superintendents r espectively w .e.f. 01.01.1996. Vide impugned O.M. dated 21.04.2004 ( Annexure A -1), t he pay scales in the cadre of Inspectors and Superintendents w ere r evised to Rs. 6500-10500/- and Rs. 7500-12000/- r espectively w .e.f. 21.04.2004 in both CBDT (Income Tax) and CBEC (excise and Customs).

+05'30' 4. The ministries, including the Ministry of R ailways, M inistry o f

Finance, Divisional Accounts in Indian Audit and Accounts D epartment,

Ministry of Personnel, PG and Pension granted higher P ay S cales b ased

on the same anomaly which was created by the 5 t h C PC n otionally w .e.f. 01.01.1996 and actually w.e.f. dates stated in the o rders v ide o rder dated 07.03.2003, 24.02.2004, 26.04.2004 a nd 2 5.01.2006 respectively. In the case of the applicant, the benefit o f h igher p ay s cale has been granted o