2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3623

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Veena Kothavale, Judicial Member, Sisir Kumar Ratho, Administrative Member
F. Mahesh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA No. 310/0921 of 2021

Prospective recruitment rules cannot deny existing incumbents pay upgradation and re-designation benefits; equal pay for equal work mandates parity among co-appointees/juniors despite qualification differences, preventing pay anomalies.

Headnote:(A) Service Law - Pay Scale Upgradation and Re-designation - Recruitment Rules Revision - Lab Technicians appointed under pre-revised rules entitled to benefits of prospective pay upgradation and re-designation to Medical Laboratory Technologist with upgraded pay scale (PB-2, GP Rs.4200/-, Level 6) from 27/01/2020, irrespective of possessing qualifications stipulated in revised rules - Revised rules prospective, cannot retrospectively impair accrued rights or service conditions of existing incumbents - Denial of benefits to some while granting to co-appointees/juniors performing same duties violates equal pay for equal work, causing pay anomaly (juniors drawing higher pay than seniors) - Condition in implementation order excluding incumbents without new qualifications beyond approved rules, arbitrary and illegal - Structural adjustment to ensure uniformity across institutes under Ministry mandates parity for all existing staff (Paras 35, 38-39, 45).

(B) Constitutional Law - Articles 14 and 16 - Discrimination - Selective application of pay revision benefits to incumbents with specific degree while excluding others appointed under same rules/process, irrational and discriminatory - Principle of equal pay for equal work deducible from Constitution, applicable to identical work under same employer without rational classification (Para 34).

(C) Administrative Law - Prospective Rules - Statutory/autonomous body orders - No retrospective effect to rules impairing existing rights unless expressly provided - Prerogative to adjust pay scales does not permit arbitrary exclusion or creation of anomalies; must follow norms of parent ministry (Paras 31, 37-38).

Facts of the case:
Applicants, appointed as Lab Technicians in 2016 under pre-revised recruitment rules (PB-1, GP Rs.2400/-), performing identical duties as co-appointees/juniors granted upgradation to Medical Laboratory Technologist (PB-2, GP Rs.4200/-) from 27/01/2020 per revised rules requiring Bachelor's degree in Medical Laboratory Science with 2 years experience. Respondents denied benefits citing lack of new qualifications, leading to pay disparity and anomaly despite prospective effect of revisions.

Findings of Court:
Impugned order set aside; directed re-designation as Medical Laboratory Technologist and pay upgradation to Level 6 from 27/01/2020 with arrears and consequential benefits within 3 months.

Issues: Whether existing Lab Technicians qualify for pay upgradation/re-designation under prospectively revised rules; validity of excluding incumbents without new qualifications while granting to others; constitutionality of pay anomaly and unequal pay for equal work.

Ratio Decidendi: Upgradation applies to post held by incumbents; revised prospective rules cannot divest accrued pay rights or discriminate among equals; benefits extended uniformly irrespective of qualifications to avoid anomalies, per parent ministry norms and parity objective.

Result: OA allowed.

Table of Content
1. applicants appointed as lab technicians in 2016 under original rrs. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. revised rrs effective 27/01/2020 deny upgrade to applicants. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 29)
3. respondents justify prospective upgrade based on qualifications. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. applicants argue discrimination, non-retrospective rrs. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
5. counsel arguments on equal pay and qualifications. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
6. background of pay revision in national institutes. (Para 26 , 27 , 28)
7. applicants entitled to redesignation despite prospective rules. (Para 30 , 31 , 32)
8. equal pay for equal work applies to same post holders. (Para 33 , 34 , 35)
9. prospective rules cannot impair existing rights. (Para 37 , 38 , 39)
10. arbitrary denial of upgrade violates equality. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45)
11. impugned order set aside, pay upgrade directed. (Para 46)

(Hon'ble Ms. Veena Kothavale, Member(J)

Applicants have filed this OA seeking to quash the proceedings F. No.2-

nd

77/2017-CCRS/Estt. dated 03/09/2020 issued by the 2 Respondent and to direct the Respondents herein to re-designate their post as Medical Lab Technologist and upgrade the pay scale from Pay Band-1 to Pay Band-2 with Grade Pay of Rs 4200/- with effect from date of initial appointment as done in the case of National Institute of Siddha.

2. Briefly, the case of the applicants is that they were appointed to the Group ‘C’ posts of Lab Technician pursuant to the Notification/Advertisement No.03/2015 nd issued by the 2 Respondent. The name of the post, scale of pay, number of vacancies, age, education and other qualifications as advertised in the above said notification are as under: -

Name of the Post : Lab Technician Scale of pay : (PBI) Rs.5200-20200 + GP Rs.2400 No. of Vacancies : 11 (UR-7, SC-2, ST-2)

Age : 25 years and below Educational and other Qualifications:

Essential:

(a) Degree (10+2+3 Pattern) in Science in concerned discipline (Chemistry/ Bio-Chemistry/MLT/Botany)/Degree in Pharmacology or B.

Pharm from a recognised university;

(b) One year experience in laboratory technology in a lab of a recognised Hospital/Institution;

OR th (a) 12 (10+2) class or equivalent with science subject from a recognized Board)/University;

(b) Diploma in Medical Laboratory Technology of minimum one year duration from a recognised University/ Institution;

(c) Two years Experience in a laboratory of recognised Hospital/

Institution.

3. All five applicants herein had participated in the written test held on 25/06/2016 and were selected on the basis of their meritorious performance. They were among 13 persons selected for the posts and were issued appointment order on 19/08/2016 for the said post of Lab Technician and were all sanctioned the same scale of pay of Rs.5200-20200+Rs.2400. They have continued their service in the said post till date.

4. While the facts remain so, the 2^nd Respondent vide proceedings in F. No.2- 77/2018-CCRS/ Estt dated 03/09/2020 has issued order regarding revision of recruitment rules and upgradation of pay scales of laboratory staff in CCRS. The existing recruitment rules for the post of Lab Assistant/ Lab Technician were declared to have been superseded by revised recruitment rules and upgradation of pay scale was declared as effective from 27/01/2020. In the said proceedings, it has been mentioned that in the case of Lab Technician, necessary action may be initiated for revising the designation and pay scale of existing Lab Technician who are in possession of essential educational qualification and experience stipulated in the revised RRs, i.e., bachelor’s degree in medical laboratory science with 2 years relevant experience as Medical Laboratory Technologist and placing them in the upgraded pay matrix with effect from 27/01/2020. It has also been declared therein that in case of incumbent not possessing the stipulated essential educational qualification and experience, the revised pay scale and re-designation will not be g

Click Here to Read the rest of this document