Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M. SWAMINATHAN, Judicial Member, M.L. SRIVASTAVA, Administrative Member
R. Bhavani – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
OA
Important Points
Subject
Service Law - Pay Scales and Allowances
Act Referred
Constitution of India: Art.14
Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 1997
Headnote
(B) Service Law - Pay parity and anomaly rectification - Similarly situated employees entitled to same benefits as granted to others via judicial orders and anomaly committee recommendations; model employer bound to extend benefits across the board without awaiting litigation; judgments favouring parity not confined to parties therein. (Paras 32, 33, 35)
(C) Limitation - Section 21(3) of Administrative Tribunals Act - No condonation needed for recurring pay fixation claims; post-anomaly committee implementation (22.09.2023) provides fresh context; fence-sitter doctrine inapplicable where parity violated. (Paras 30, 31)
Facts of the case:
Retired Superintendent sought upgraded pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.1996 per 5th CPC, challenging rejection letter dated 29.08.2023 limiting benefits to 21.04.2004; relied on multiple Tribunal/High Court/Supreme Court orders and anomaly committee for Income Tax Inspectors extended to Central Excise/Customs; respondents raised limitation and in personam objections.
Findings of Court:
Notional pay refixation w.e.f. 01.01.1996; actual monetary benefits w.e.f. 21.04.2004; complete exercise within two months; OA allowed without costs.
Issues: Entitlement to notional/actual pay benefits w.e.f. 01.01.1996 vs. 21.04.2004; applicability of prior judgments to non-parties; limitation and laches.
Ratio Decidendi: Prior orders on pay upgradation for similarly situated employees bind as in rem; Article 14 violated by discriminatory denial; recurring pay cause negates delay; anomaly rectification effective from 01.01.1996 notionally.
Result: OA allowed.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Thirumalai Rajagopal
For the Respondents: Mr. J. Vasu
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant's claim for revised pay scales from 01.01.1996. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. precedents and judgments supporting retrospective pay benefits. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. respondents' defense on limitation, laches, and personam judgments. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. historical litigation and anomaly committee recommendations. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 5. article 14 equality for similarly situated employees. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 6. notional pay from 1996, actual benefits from 2004. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
ORAL ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. L. Srivastava, Member(A))
1.In the instant OA, the applicant seek the following relief:
“(i) To call for the records of the Respondents and to set aside the Letter No. GCCO/II/39/54/2022-CCA Estt dated 29.08.2023 passed by 1st respondent and declare that the Applicant herein is entitled to the benefits of revised/ replaced pay scale/ upgraded pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 for the period he was working as Inspector of Central Excise and of Rs.7500-12000 in respect of his service as Superintendents of Central Excise/Customs with effect from 1.1.1996 on actual basis, the date when the 5th CPC became operational, based on the judgments / decisions of the Supreme Court and various High Courts and Tribunals as detailed above and as has been granted to the employees of other departments of various Ministries under the Union of India;
(ii) To appropriately modify the action/order of the Respondents vide letter F.No.6/37/98-IC dated 21.4.2004 to the extent it limits the actual benefits of the revised pay scale/upgraded pay scale by granting the same w.e.f. 21.4.2004 and not granting the benefits with effect from 1.1.1996 which is arbitrary, illegal and discriminatory. (iii) To call for the records of the Respondents and to set aside the letter File No. GCCO/II/39/54/2022-CCA ESTT dated 29.8.2023 as the same are without any justifiable reason and non-speaking.
(iv) To direct the Respondents to grant benefits of revised pay and allowances to the Applicant from 1.1.1996 on actual basis;
(v) To grant and pay consequential arrears of pay and allowance for the period from 1.1.1996 to 20.4.2004, to issue revised Pension Payment Orders accordingly and also the post-retirement benefits to, along with appropriate and applicable interest per annum;
(vi) To direct the Respondents to pay the cost of the litigation to the Applicant as he has been deliberately dragged to the Tribunal by the Respondents; and (vii) To issue appropriate directions or orders which the Tribunal deems fit, just and proper in the circumstance of the case to meet the ends of justice.”
2. The brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicant are as follows:
The applicant has preferred this Original Application with many reliefs, mainly for the entitlement of benefits of revised / replaced pay scale / upgraded pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 for the period he was working as Inspector of Central Excise and of Rs.7500-12000 in respect of her service as Superintendents of Central Excise/Customs with effect from 1.1.1996 on actual basis, the date when the 5th CPC became operational joined the department retired from respondent department as Superintendent are Inspectors, Superintendents, Assistant Commissioners and Deputy Commissioner (serving and retired officers) from various Central Excise, GST and Customs Commissionerate's in Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. The Applicant is claiming that the denial of financial benefits, specifically arrears of pay and allowances, is arbitrary, illegal, and discriminatory. The Government Resolution enforces the scales of pay recommended by the 5th Central Pay Commission (CPC) from 01.01.1996. However, the Applicant asserts that he has been denied these benefits. This Tribunal had previously allowed three Original Applications, OA No.1407/2015, OA No.1607/2015 & OA No.1608/2015, granting the revised pay scale arrears from
