Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4225

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M.Swaminathan, Judicial Member, M.L.Srivastava, Administrative Member
T.Duraipandian – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A. 806/2025

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

Inspectors/Superintendents in Customs entitled to notional revised pay scales from 01.01.1996 with actual benefits from 21.04.2004 on parity with sister department, precedents binding in rem, delay no bar for recurring pay fixation claims.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1997 - 5th Central Pay Commission - Pay revision for Inspectors and Superintendents in Customs Department - Revised pay scales of Rs.6500-10500 for Inspectors and Rs.7500-12000 for Superintendents - Notional fixation effective from 01.01.1996 with actual monetary benefits from 21.04.2004 - Office Memoranda dated 21.04.2004, 11.05.2004, 25.07.2023 and communication dated 17.04.2025 challenged - Entitlement upheld on parity with similarly situated employees in analogous departments under common parent department - Special Anomaly Committee recommendations applied uniformly - Prior judicial precedents binding across benches as judgments in rem - Article 14 equality violated by discriminatory application - Fence-sitters entitled to benefits despite delay as pay fixation recurring cause of action - Refixation directed with consequential arrears and pensionary benefits within two months. (Paras 21, 26-28, 32, 35-41)

(B) Limitation - Section 21, Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Delay and laches not bar where recurring cause of action in pay fixation - Subsequent implementation of parity benefits to others constitutes continuing wrong - No condonation application needed per High Court precedents. (Paras 30-31)

(C) Service Jurisprudence - Parity and non-discrimination - Similarly situated employees entitled to uniform treatment - Prior orders granting benefits operate in rem, not confined in personam - Department bound to extend across similarly placed without fresh litigation. (Paras 32-34, 36)

Facts of the case:
Applicants, Inspectors and Superintendents in Customs Department who joined or promoted between 01.01.1996 and 21.04.2004, challenged denial of revised 5th CPC pay scales effective from 01.01.1996, granted only from 21.04.2004 - Relied on multiple Tribunal, High Court and Supreme Court orders affirming parity with analogous posts in sister revenue department - Respondents contested on grounds of limitation, fence-sitting and in personam nature of precedents.

Findings of Court:
Impugned orders set aside - Pay refixation directed notionally from 01.01.1996 and actually from 21.04.2004 with arrears, pension fixation and consequential benefits - Completed within two months - OA allowed without costs.

Issues: Core issue whether notional pay fixation from 01.01.1996 with actual benefits from 21.04.2004 or only from 21.04.2004 - Maintainability despite delay - Applicability of parity precedents to non-parties - Personam vs in rem effect.

Ratio Decidendi: Similarly situated employees entitled to uniform pay revision benefits from 01.01.1996 on notional basis per Anomaly Committee and binding precedents under common department - Discriminatory denial violates Article 14 - Delay immaterial for recurring pay claims - Precedents in rem extend parity without fresh cause of action.

Result: OA allowed.

Table of Content
1. applicants seek revised pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.1996 (Para 1 , 2)
2. precedents support pay parity from 01.01.1996 (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. claims barred by limitation and laches (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
4. background of anomaly committee and precedents reviewed (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
5. equality mandates benefits for similarly situated employees (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
6. judgments in rem; notional from 1996, actual from 2004 (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40)
7. oa allowed with directed pay refixation (Para 41)

ORDER

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr.M.L.SRIVASTAVA, Member(A)) The applicants have filed the present OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following relief:

“(A). This Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased 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 i.e.Annexure-A1 and (ii) Office Memorandum in File No.A- 26017/65/2003-Ad.II-A(Pt) dated 11.05.2004 i.e. Annexure A2 and its subsequent (latest) Office Memorandum in File No.A-26017/65/2003- Ad.II-A(Pt) dated 25.07.2023 i.e. Annexure A3, (iii) and (iv) against the communication dated 17.04.2025 ie Annexure-A4 by the respondent-5, issued under F.No.III/(20)/2/2025-ACCTS-O/o-comm-Cus-Gen and after going through 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 0.01.1996, with further directions to the respondents to grant the benefit of revised scale/grade w.e.f. 01.01.1996 with appropriate pay and pension fixation and actual benefit i.e. grant of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to Inspector (Customs) and Rs.7500-12000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to superintendent/appraiser (Customs/ Appraiser) along with actual arrears of pay with 18% interest thereon.

(B). The Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to hold and declare that the impugned action of the respondents to revise the pay scale from 21.04.2004 (Annexure-A1) is absolutely arbitrary and illegal and accordingly hold, declare and direct the respondents that the Inspectors, superintendents/Appraisers (Customs) are entitled to the revised pay scales of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to Inspector (Customs) and Rs.7500-12000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to superintendent/Appraiser (Customs) with all consequential benefits i.e. proper pay fixation, pension fixation, actual arrears of salary, pension and other retiral dues with 18% interest thereon.

(C) Any other and further additional orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the nature 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 applicants either joined as Inspectors in the Central Excise & Customs Department or were promoted from lower post to the post of Inspectors and from Inspectors promoted to the post of Superintendents during the period from 01.01.1996 to 21.04.2004. 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. 6500–200–10500, 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 Examine

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4225

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALM.Swaminathan, Judicial Member, M.L.Srivastava, Administrative MemberT.Duraipandian – AppellantVersusUnion of India – RespondentO.A. 806/2025

Inspectors/Superintendents in Customs entitled to notional revised pay scales from 01.01.1996 with actual benefits from 21.04.2004 on parity with sister department, precedents binding in rem, delay no bar for recurring pay fixation claims.

Cases Referred (8)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M.Swaminathan, Judicial Member, M.L.Srivastava, Administrative Member
T.Duraipandian – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A. 806/2025