SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3545

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member, M.L. Srivastava, Administrative Member
Rajasimman – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s P. Ayyamperumal
For the Respondents: Mr. Su.Srinivasan, SCGSC

Inspectors/Superintendents in Central Tax entitled to notional pay scale upgradation w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and actual benefits from 21.04.2004, based on parity, Article 14, and in rem precedents; delay not bar for recurring pay claims.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 21 - Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1997 - 5th Central Pay Commission - Pay scale revision for Inspectors and Superintendents in Central Tax and Customs Department - Revised pay scales of Rs.6500-10500 for Inspectors and Rs.7500-12000 for Superintendents - Upgradation made effective from 21.04.2004 instead of 01.01.1996 - Applicant sought quashing of orders to extent they deny benefit w.e.f. 01.01.1996 with arrears and 18% interest - Tribunal held that similarly situated employees entitled to notional fixation w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and actual monetary benefits from 21.04.2004, relying on precedents affirming parity under Article 14, Special Anomaly Committee recommendations, and judgments in rem applicable to all - Delay not fatal as pay fixation is recurring cause of action; fence-sitter argument rejected given uniform implementation by department - Directed refixation of pay notionally from 01.01.1996 and actual benefits from 21.04.2004 with consequential benefits including pension within two months. (Paras 21, 26-40)

(B) Service Law - Parity and equality - Judgments granting pay benefits to similarly situated employees operate in rem, not in personam - Department bound to extend benefits uniformly without awaiting individual litigation; discrimination in application violates Article 14 - Doctrine of delay/laches inapplicable to recurring pay claims; subsequent judicial resolutions provide basis for relief. (Paras 32-35)

(C) Limitation - Section 21(1) - No fresh cause of action from parity judgments or implementations; however, where anomaly rectification stems from 01.01.1996 and department accepts nationwide orders, claims not stale - No need for condonation where merits favor equity. (Paras 13-17, 30-31)

Facts of the case:
Applicant joined as Inspector on 22.10.1990, promoted to Superintendent on 20.06.2005, retired as Assistant Commissioner on 30.11.2023. Pre-5th CPC scales were Rs.1640-2900 (Inspectors) and Rs.2000-3500 (Superintendents). Post-revision, scales upgraded but effective only from 21.04.2004 per Office Memoranda, denying notional benefits from 01.01.1996 despite Tribunal/High Court/Supreme Court orders in similar cases favoring parity with other revenue departments.

Findings of Court:
Impugned orders set aside; pay to be refixed notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1996 per Revised Pay Rules,1997; actual monetary benefits from 21.04.2004 with arrears and consequential benefits including pension; exercise within two months.

Issues: (1) Entitlement to notional pay fixation w.e.f. 01.01.1996 vs. actual benefits only from 21.04.2004; (2) Applicability of parity from other benches/courts; (3) Bar of limitation/delay/laches.

Ratio Decidendi: Similarly placed employees across departments under common cadre entitled to uniform pay revision w.e.f. 01.01.1996 notionally per Anomaly Committee and binding precedents; judgments in rem mandate extension without discrimination; pay anomalies involve recurring cause, overriding fence-sitter objections.

Result: OA allowed.

Table of Content
1. applicant's reliefs and career facts (Para 1 , 2)
2. precedents supporting retrospective pay (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. limitation, delay, and fence-sitters (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
4. background of anomaly committee decisions (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29)
5. no delay; parity for similarly situated (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37)
6. notional pay from 1996, actual from 2004 (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41)

ORDER

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member)

The applicant has filed the OA seeking the following relief:

“A) ….To call for records and proceedings of the case which led to the passing of the orders i.e (i) Office Memorandum in File No.6/37/98-IC dated 21.04.2004 ie Annexure -A1 and (ii) Office Memorandum in File No.26017/65/2003-Ad.II-A(Pt) dated 11.05.2004 i.e Annexure A.2 its subsequent (latest) Office Memorandum in File No. A.26017/65/2003-Ad.II-A(Pt)25.07.2023 i.e Annexure A3, (iii)against the speaking order dated 12.08.2025 (Issued F.No.GCCO/II/24/51/2025-CAO- O/o PrCC-CGST-Zone-Chennai) of the 4th respondent (Annexure A-5) and after going though their propriety, legality and constitutional validity be pleased to quash and set aside the same only to the extent it makes the revised pay scale effective from 21.04.2004 instead of 01.01.1996, with further directions to the respondents to grant the benefit of revised scale/grade w.e.f. 01.01.1996 with appropriate pay fixation and actual benefit i.e. grant of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to the Inspector(Applicant) and Rs.7500-12000/- wef 01.01.1996 to Superintendent (applicant) along with actual arrears of pay with 18% interest thereon.

B) To hold and declare that the impugned action of the respondents to revise and pay scale from 21.04.2004 (Annexure-A1) is absolutely arbitrary and illegal and accordingly hold, declare and direct the respondents that the Inspector and Superintendent are entitled to the revised pay scales of Rs.6500- 10500 w.e.f.01.01.1996 to Inspector and Rs.7500- 12000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to Superintendent with all consequential benefits i.e proper pay fixation, and actual arrears of salary, with 18% interest thereon

C) Any other and further additional orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the natural and circumstances of the case may be passed.

D) Cost of the application be provided for.”

2. The facts leading to the filing of the case are as follows:

The applicant joined as Inspector of Customs & Central Excise on 22.10.1990 and promoted to the post of Superintendent on 20.06.2005 and retired as Assistant Commissioner of Customs & Excise on 30.11.2023. Prior to 01.01.1996, the pay scale of Inspectors/Preventive Officers/Customs Examiners was Rs. 1640–2900. On promotion to the post of Superintendent/Appraiser, the applicable pay scale was Rs. 2000– 3500. Upon implementation of the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission, the pay scale of Inspectors/Customs Examiners/Preventive Officers was revised to Rs. 6500–10500, and that of Superintendents/Appraisers was revised to Rs. 7500–12000. However, the revised pay scales were made effective from 21.04.2004 instead of 01.01.1996, the date on which the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission came into effect. Despite various decisions rendered by Tribunals and High Courts across the country, and finally by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the benefit of the revised pay scales of Rs. 6500–10500 for Inspectors/Customs Examiners/Preventive Officers and Rs. 7500– 12000 for Superintendents/Appraisers were denied to the applicant. Hence, the present OA.

3. The learned Counsel for the applicant invited our attention to the common order dated 09.01.2024 passed by the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in OA No. 1089/2019 & batch, which was upheld by the Hon’ble High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad in W.P.(C) No. 10490/2024 by order dated 09.08.2024, and thereafter affirmed by the Hon

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top