Reserved (On 10.12.2025)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH JABALPUR Dated : This the 19^th day of February 2026 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Akhil Kumar Srivastava, Member (J)

Hon’ble Ms Mallika Arya, Member (A) Original Application No. 1115 of 2018 Smt. Shilpi Ghosh W/o Shri Arvind Ghosh aged about 62 years, Retired Asstt. Postmaster, R/o 1101/1, Satyanand Vihar, Rampur, Jabalpur (M.P.) - 482008.

…….Applicant By Adv: Shri J.B. Singh V E R S U S

1. Union of India through Secretary, Department of Posts, Dak Bhavan, 1, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001

2. Postmaster General, Indore Region, Indore-462012

3. Director of Accounts (Postal), 4^th Floor, Dak Bhavan, Hoshangabad -Road, Bhopal-462012

4. Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Jabalpur Division, PIYUPIYU SH SH Jabalpur-482001 CHACHA NDRNDR

5. Senior Postmaster, Jabalpur Head Post Officer-482001.

……..Respondents By Adv: Shri P.K. Chourasia

O R D E R

By Ms. Mallika Arya, AM The applicant is challenging order dated 28.04.2017 (Annexure A-6) whereby Respondent No. 5 has rejected the claim of the applicant for stepping up her pay with reference to her juniors i.e. Shri Edmond Tappo and Smt. Sudha Jha. She is also challenging the order dated 28.12.2017 (Annexure A-14) whereby the Respondent No. 4 has rejected her claim. Consequent upon the implementation of the 6^th CPC the pay of the applicant was fixed on 01.01.2006 at the higher side than her juniors namely Shri Edmond Toppo and Smt. Sudha Jha. On promotion both Shri Edmond Toppo and Smt. Sudha Jha started drawing higher pay in comparison to the applicant as on 01.07.2006. On circulation of the gradation list on 01.07.2014 the applicant noticed this anomaly and represented to Respondent No. 5 vide letter dated 13.08.2016, 30.08.2016 (Annexure A-1), 18.10.2016 (Annexure A-3). The claim of the applicant was rejected by PIYUPIYU SH SH CHACHA NDRNDR Respondent No. 5 vide order dated 28.04.2017 (Annexure A-6).

She subsequently represented to Respondent No. 4 on 25.07.2017 (Annexure A-8). Followed by subsequent representations, she filed an application under the RTI. The applicant was communicated that her claim has been rejected as per order dated 28.12.2017 (Annexure A-14) by Respondent No. 4. Thereafter the applicant preferred an appeal before Respondent No. 2 on 30.01.2018 (Annexure A-15) and sent a reminder dated 27.03.2018 (Annexure A-16). However, she did not get any response.

2. As per instructions contained in Note 10 below Para (D) of Rule 7 of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, where “a senior Government servant promoted to a higher pay before 1^st day of January 2006 draws less pay in the revised pay structure than his junior who is promoted to the higher post on or after the 1^st day of January, 2006, the pay in the pay band of the senior Government servant should be stepped up to an amount equal to the pay in the pay band as fixed for his junior in that higher post subject to fulfillment of certain PIYUPIYU conditions.” Since the applicant is fulfilling the criteria prescribed SH SH CHACHA NDRNDR A A under the said rule, she is entitled for stepping up of her pay vis-

a-vis her juniors Shri Edmond Toppa and Smt. Sudha Jha. Therefore the orders dated 28.04.2017 (Annexure-6) and 28.12.2017 (Annexure A-14) merit to be quashed. The applicant has already retired on 31.10.2016 and has been representing since the time she was in service. Her salary has got affected since 01.01.2006 and her pension is also getting adversely affected on account of the same.

3. The respondents on the other hand have submitted that the applicant was not found eligible for stepping up of pay under Rule 7 of CCS Revised Pay Rule 1997 for the second time. OM NO. F- 4/7/83-Estt(P-1) dated 31.03.1984 stated as follows "It is clarified that the benefits of stepping up of pay can be allowed to a senior official, second time, provided the anomaly has arisen with reference to the pay of the same junior, with reference to whom the pay of senior can be stepped up first t