Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member, M. L. Srivastava, Administrative Member
K. Kalaichelvi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant seeks pay upgradation w.e.f. 01.01.1996. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. precedents support notional pay fixation from 1996. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. respondents argue limitation and no parity. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. anomaly committee recommends retrospective fixation. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 5. art.14 mandates parity for similarly situated. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 6. oa allowed with notional from 1996, actual from 2004. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
ORAL ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. L. Srivastava, Administrative Member)
1.This OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief:
(i) To call for the records of the respondents and to declare that the applicant herein is entitled to the benefits of revised pay scale with effect from 01.01.1996 on actual basis, i.e., from the date when the 5th CPV became operational, based on the judgements/decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts and Tribunals and to set aside/quash the speaking order in File No. GCCO/III/24/51/2025, CAO-O/o Pr.CC-CGST-Zone- Chennai, dated 12.08.2025 of the Principal Chief Commissi
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
