Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member, M.L. Srivastava, Administrative Member
G.Subbulakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A./1533/2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s P. Ayyamperumal
For the Respondents: Mr. M. Kishore Kumar, SPC

Similarly situated employees entitled to notional pay fixation of upgraded scales from 01.01.1996 and actual benefits from 21.04.2004; prior judgments in rem mandate parity, delay immaterial for recurring pay claims under equality principle.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 21 - Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1997 - 5th Central Pay Commission - Pay revision for Inspectors/Preventive Officers/Superintendents - Upgraded pay scales of Rs.6500-10500 and Rs.7500-12000 - Notional fixation effective from 01.01.1996, actual monetary benefits from 21.04.2004 - Applicant promoted as Preventive Officer and later Superintendent - Claim for revised scales from 01.01.1996 denied earlier vide Office Memoranda - Relief sought quashing orders limiting effect to 21.04.2004 - Tribunal holds similarly situated employees entitled to parity, judgments operate in rem not in personam - Delay not fatal as pay fixation recurring cause of action - Doctrine of equality under Article 14 mandates uniform treatment - Directions issued for notional refixation from 01.01.1996, actual benefits from 21.04.2004 with arrears and consequential benefits including pension. (Paras 21, 32, 34, 40)

(B) Limitation - Fence-sitters and stale claims - Subsequent judgments or implementations for others do not create fresh cause of action - However, where anomaly rectification stems from 01.01.1996 and parity established, claims sustainable despite delay - No condonation needed for recurring pay issues. (Paras 30-31)

(C) Judicial precedents - Dismissal of SLPs without reasons not merger; orders in personam unless held in rem - Uniform implementation across departments under common cadre essential to avoid discrimination. (Paras 16, 35)

Facts of the case:
Retired Assistant Director claims revised pay scales under 5th Pay Commission for posts of Preventive Officer (Rs.6500-10500) and Superintendent (Rs.7500-12000) notionally from 01.01.1996, actually from that date, challenging Office Memoranda effective from 21.04.2004. Respondents deny on grounds of limitation, fence-sitting, and executive policy.

Findings of Court:
Respondents to refix pay notionally from 01.01.1996 per Revised Pay Rules, 1997, grant actual monetary benefits from 21.04.2004 with arrears, consequential and pensionary benefits within two months.

Issues: Core issue whether entitled to notional pay fixation from 01.01.1996 with actual benefits therefrom or only from 21.04.2004; applicability of limitation and parity to similarly situated employees.

Ratio Decidendi: Similarly situated employees must receive uniform pay benefits; prior judgments granting relief in rem bind department; pay anomaly rectification requires notional effect from 01.01.1996, actual from upgrade date; equality under Article 14 violated by discriminatory implementation; recurring pay cause overrides delay objections.

Result: OA allowed on terms indicated; no costs.

Table of Content
1. applicant's reliefs and career facts (Para 1 , 2)
2. precedents support pay w.e.f. 01.01.1996 (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. oa barred by limitation and laches (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
4. anomaly committee history and parity (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
5. judgments in rem for similarly situated (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37)
6. notional pay from 1996, actual from 2004 (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41)

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. L. Srivastava, Member(A))

In the instant OA, the applicant seek 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 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, 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). against the communication dated 14.08.2025 (F.No. Nil) of the 5th respondent. (Annexure- A5) 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 fixation and actual benefit i.e. grant of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to the customs preventive officer (Applicant) and Rs.7500-12000/- w.e.f. 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 the 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/customs examiner/customs preventive officer and Rs.7500-12000/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 to superintendent/appraiser 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 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 brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicant are as follows:

The applicant got promoted as Preventive officer of customs on

19.12.2002 and from the post of Preventive officer of customs promoted to the post of superintendent on 25.09.2013 and further promoted as Assistant Commissioner of customs & Excise on 10.10.2023. Prior to 01.01.1996 the scale of Inspector/Preventive officer/Customs Examiner was of Rs.1640-2900 and on promotion as superintendent/appraiser was of Rs.2000-3500. The 5th Pay Commission recommended revised pay scale of Rs. 6500-10,500/- to the post of Inspectors/Customs Examiner/preventive officer and Rs.7500-12000 - to the post of Superintendents/Appraiser. This was made effective from 21.04.2004 vide Annexure A1 & A2 supra instead of effective date of 01.0.1996, the date on which the proposals of 5th pay commission came into effect. The benefit of pay scales (w.e.f. 01.01.1996) of scale of Rs. 6500-10,500/- to the post of Inspectors/customs examiner/PO and Rs. 7500-12000/- to the post of Superintendents/Appraisers, extendable to each applicant herein, were denied despite various decisions of the Tribunals, High Courts etc. across the country and finally the Apex Court. Hence this OA is filed seeking the above relief.

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 date

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALM. Swaminathan, Judicial Member, M.L. Srivastava, Administrative MemberG.Subbulakshmi – AppellantVersusUnion of India – RespondentO.A./1533/2025

Similarly situated employees entitled to notional pay fixation of upgraded scales from 01.01.1996 and actual benefits from 21.04.2004; prior judgments in rem mandate parity, delay immaterial for recurring pay claims under equality principle.

Cases Referred (3)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member, M.L. Srivastava, Administrative Member
G.Subbulakshmi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A./1533/2025