Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4226
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M.Swaminathan, Judicial Member, M.L.Srivastava, Administrative Member
C.Rajakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA 821/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s.P.Ayyamperumal
For the Respondents: Mr.Su.Srinivasan
Upgraded pay scales for Inspectors/Superintendents granted notionally from 01.01.1996 and actually from 21.04.2004 to ensure parity; prior judgments in rem apply to all similarly situated employees, overriding delay objections.
Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1997 - 5th Central Pay Commission - Pay scales of Inspectors and Superintendents in Central Tax and Customs Department - Upgraded pay scales of Rs.6500-10500 for Inspectors and Rs.7500-12000 for Superintendents - Granted notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1996 (date of 5th CPC implementation) and actual monetary benefits from 21.04.2004 (date of Office Memorandum) with consequential benefits including arrears and pensionary benefits - Special Anomaly Committee recommendations applied uniformly across similarly situated employees under common Department of Revenue - Prior Tribunal, High Court and Supreme Court orders binding as judgments in rem, not in personam - Discrimination in pay fixation violates Article 14 equality - Delay and laches not applicable to recurring pay fixation cause of action; fence-sitters entitled to parity with diligent litigants - Respondents directed to refix pay within two months. (Paras 21, 35, 41-42)
(B) Service Law - Pay Parity and Anomaly Rectification - Similarly situated employees must receive uniform treatment; benefit extended to one group binds others - No separate Anomaly Committee needed for different boards under same department - Executive policy cannot deny retrospective notional fixation post-judicial acceptance - Doctrine of merger inapplicable to SLP dismissals without speaking orders. (Paras 32-36)
(C) Limitation - Section 21 of Administrative Tribunals Act - Pay revision constitutes continuing wrong; representations and subsequent judicial implementations revive claim - No condonation needed where parity enforced post-final orders. (Paras 30-31)
Facts of the case:
Applicants, Inspectors and Superintendents, sought quashing of Office Memorandums fixing upgraded pay scales from 21.04.2004 instead of 01.01.1996, claiming parity with similarly placed employees granted benefits notionally from 01.01.1996 per 5th CPC, following Special Anomaly Committee recommendations and multiple Tribunal/High Court/Supreme Court orders upheld across benches.
Findings of Court:
Impugned orders set aside; pay refixed notionally w.e.f. 01.01.1996 and actual benefits from 21.04.2004 with arrears, pension fixation and consequential reliefs within two months.
Issues: (1) Effective date of upgraded pay scales - 01.01.1996 notionally or 21.04.2004 only; (2) Applicability of prior judgments to non-parties; (3) Bar of limitation for delayed OA.
Ratio Decidendi: Uniform pay benefits mandatory for similarly situated employees under Article 14; prior final orders operate in rem; recurring pay fixation not barred by limitation; Anomaly Committee uniform for Department of Revenue.
Result: Original Application allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicants seek revised pay scales from 01.01.1996. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. applicants rely on precedents for pay parity from 1996. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. respondents argue delay, laches, and in personam judgments. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. court reviews history of anomaly committee and precedents. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 5. judgments in rem require parity for similarly situated employees. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 6. notional pay from 1996, actual from 2004 granted. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42) |
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 and against the Communication dated 04.03.2024 of the 5th respondent with enclosure of the letter of the 4th respondent- Annexure-A-20 and against the communication dated 05.12.2023 of the 6th respondent issued under C.No.II/(25)/237/2022- Accts, in respect of the 16th applicant -Annexure-A21 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 (Central Excise & Customs) and Rs.7500- 12000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to superintendent/appraiser (Central Excise & Customs) 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 and superintendents/Appraisers (Central Excise & Customs) are entitled to the revised pay scales of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to Inspector (Central Excise & Customs) and Rs.7500-12000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to superintendent/Appraiser (Central Excise & 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. De
