The court upheld the protection of Grade Pay for employees post-transfer, aligning with MACP guidelines and previous judicial rulings.

Feeling aggrieved by the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A No.799 of 2018 Union of India and its officers preferred this OP(CAT). Facts necessary for the disposal of the OP(CAT) in brief are narrated here under. 2. The respondent/applicant, Sri.Bhanumati Nair, has been appointed as staff nurse in the Employees State Insurance Corporation on 31.12.1991 in ESI Hospital, Basaidarapur, New Delhi in the pay scale of Rs.1400-2600/-. The respondent/appellant was promoted as Nursing Sister in the year 2002. After the implemention of the 6^th Central pay commission (CPC) the pay of the respondent/applicant was fixed at Rs.13,160/- in Pay Band-2 with a grade pay of Rs.4,800/- with effect from 01.01.2006. After the completion of 20 years of service the applicant was granted the 2^nd financial upgradation under Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP), vide annexure A1 dated 25.02.2012 the pay was fixed at Rs.17,380/- with grade pay of Rs.5,400/-.

3. The respondent/applicant submitted an application for an Inter Regional Transfer (IRT) to Kerala and was transferred to ESIC hospital at Parippally, Kollam vide Annexure A2 order. The applicant has been relieved as per Annexure A3 order. As per Annexure A3 relieving order the post of applicant was changed from ‘Nursing Sister’ to ‘Staff Nurse’. In Annexure A3 relieving order, there was stipulation that the transferee’s would be ranked junior most to all the officials in the respective base cadre on the date of joining in the new place of posting.

4. The main grievance of the respondent/applicant was that, after her inter regional transfer to Parippally the pay was refixed with a reduced grade pay of Rs.4,600/- ignoring the provisions of Rule 3(8) of the CCS (revised pay) rules, 2008. Annexure A7 representation submitted by the applicant has been rejected by the department. The respondent/appellant further contended that the tribunal has granted reliefs to the similarly placed employees in O.A No.205 of 2010 and in O.A.No.461 of 2011.

5. The stand of the petitioners/respondents was that the applicant had applied for Inter Regional Transfer knowing well that the applicant would be ranked junior most in the gradation list of the directorate/hospital in the base cadre of ‘Staff Nurse’. The Tribunal noticing the rival contentions of the parties allowed the original application.

6. The learned counsel for the respondent/applicant supported the order of Central Administrative Tribunal. On the other hand, the learned Central Government Standing Counsel submitted that the impugned order of the tribunal is patently illegal and unsustainable. The learned Central Government Counsel submitted that the impugned order of the tribunal is based on the mere assumptions and presumptions. It is submitted that the tribunal has not properly considered Annexure A6 undertaking of the applicant that she would be ranked junior most in the gradation list of the directorate in the base cadre of ‘Staff Nurse’.

7. We have heard the rival submissions of the counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.

8. The tribunal after evaluating the available materials, allowed the claim of the respondent/applicant. The relevant paragraphs of the order of the Tribunal are extracted here under;

“16. Coming to the matter at hand in light of the above, we should at the outset note that here too the respondents appear to have protected the Pay drawn in the Pay Band by the applicant i.e.Rs.17380/-. They have however not protected the Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- drawn and have reduced it to Rs.4600/-. They have taken a general stand that DoPT OM dated 21.10.2009 produced at Annexure R1(b) had indicated that this is how it should be done. However, having protected the pay amount of Rs.17,38